Misplaced Pages

MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Herbythyme (talk | contribs) at 12:13, 26 July 2008 (→webplatez.com: done). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 12:13, 26 July 2008 by Herbythyme (talk | contribs) (→webplatez.com: done)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Noticeboards
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General
Articles,
content
Page handling
User conduct
Other
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards
    MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist is a page in the MediaWiki namespace, which only administrators may edit. To request a change to it, please follow the directions at Misplaced Pages:Spam blacklist.
    Spam blacklists
    Shortcuts

    Mediawiki:Spam-blacklist is meant to be used by the spam blacklist extension. Unlike the meta spam blacklist, this blacklist affects pages on the English Misplaced Pages only. Any administrator may edit the spam blacklist. See Misplaced Pages:Spam blacklist for more information about the spam blacklist.

    Instructions for editors

    There are 4 sections for posting comments below. Please make comments in the appropriate section. These links take you to the appropriate section:

    1. Proposed additions
    2. Proposed removals
    3. Troubleshooting and problems
    4. Discussion

    Each section has a message box with instructions. In addition, please sign your posts with ~~~~ after your comment.

    Completed requests are archived. Additions and removals are logged, reasons for blacklisting can be found there.

    Addition of the templates {{Link summary}} (for domains), {{IP summary}} (for IP editors) and {{User summary}} (for users with account) results in the COIBot reports to be refreshed. See User:COIBot for more information on the reports.

    Instructions for admins Any admin unfamiliar with this page should probably read this first, thanks.
    If in doubt, please leave a request and a spam-knowledgeable admin will follow-up.

    Please consider using Special:BlockedExternalDomains instead, powered by the AbuseFilter extension. This is faster and more easily searchable, though only supports whole domains and not whitelisting.

    1. Does the site have any validity to the project?
    2. Have links been placed after warnings/blocks? Have other methods of control been exhausted? Would referring this to our anti-spam bot, XLinkBot be a more appropriate step? Is there a WikiProject Spam report? If so, a permanent link would be helpful.
    3. Please ensure all links have been removed from articles and discussion pages before blacklisting. (They do not have to be removed from user or user talk pages.)
    4. Make the entry at the bottom of the list (before the last line). Please do not do this unless you are familiar with regular expressions — the disruption that can be caused is substantial.
    5. Close the request entry on here using either {{done}} or {{not done}} as appropriate. The request should be left open for a week maybe as there will often be further related sites or an appeal in that time.
    6. Log the entry. Warning: if you do not log any entry you make on the blacklist, it may well be removed if someone appeals and no valid reasons can be found. To log the entry, you will need this number – 227999487 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.
    Archives

    Proposed additions

    Instructions for proposed additions
    1. Please add new entries to the bottom of this section.
    2. Please only use the basic URL – example.com , not https://www.example.com.
    3. Consider informing editors whose actions are discussed here.
    4. Please use the following templates:
    {{IP summary}} – to report anonymous editors suspected of spamming:
    {{IP summary|127.0.0.1}} -- do not use "subst:" with this template
    {{User summary}} – to report registered users suspected of spamming:
    {{User summary|Jimbo Wales}} -- do not use "subst:" with this template
    {{Link summary}} – to report spam domains:
    {{Link summary|example.com}} -- do not use "subst:" with this template
    Do not include the "http://www." portion of a URL inside this template, nor anything behind the domain name. Including this template will give tools to investigate the domain, and will result in COIBot refreshing the link-report. ('COIBot')
    {{BLRequestRegex}} - to suggest more complex regex filters beyond basic domain URLs
    {{BLRequestLink}} - to suggest specific links to be blacklisted
    Please provide diffs ( e.g. ] ) to show that there has been spamming!
    Completed requests should be marked with {{done}}, {{not done}}, or another appropriate indicator, and then archived.

    Rihannanow.com

    Can we blacklist the fan-made blog site www.rihannanow.com? There appears to be at least one, if not more, editor(s) attempting to pass it off on pretty much every article related to Rihanna as her "official website," which it is not. --InDeBiz1 (talk) 22:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

    I think we should blacklist it. Masterpiece2000 (talk) 03:02, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

    Missed this one - sorry. Care to let us have some links etc so that we can take a look. I don't have the time to search it all out right now. Thanks --Herby 12:17, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

     Defer to Global blacklist --Herby 11:28, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

    mediatraffic.de / fake, unreliable chart site - In the communities very own words

    Per this community ruling - Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/United World Chart. The article, chart and website are deemed unreliable. Unfortunately, IPS, newbies and fan boys keep re adding the "source" despite community consensus. The site is still used in over 1000 wikipedia article, its going to be a nightmare training people not to use it so it should be blocked. — Realist (Come Speak To Me) 02:47, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

    Looks listable BUT call me picky there is no way this should be listed until a major amount of the current links are removed. --Herby 12:10, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

    jhelumsoft.net and related

    Fairly obvious dynamic IP spamming. See WikiProject Spam report. MER-C 10:11, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

    Bump. MER-C 12:28, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

    digitalvaporizer.org

    digitalvaporizer.org: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

    Several IP addresses have spammed eternal links on Vaporizer for purely commercial purposes. Furthermore they blacklisted link of manufacturer. Examples of persistent undo's 

    http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Vaporizer&diff=222857457&oldid=222811376
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Vaporizer&diff=222677522&oldid=222621629
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Vaporizer&diff=222088032&oldid=221859481

    —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.139.78.32 (talk • contribs) 15:44, 2 Jul 2008

    Of possible interest would be this. --Herby 15:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
    This too.  — Mike.lifeguard |  16:17, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

    webplatez.com

    webplatez.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

    Spammers
    Prior spam reports
    Appears combined COI and spamming issue. Ongoing posting of links to multiple subjects that point into same domain. IP has been warned multiple times by multiple other contributors over the past several months. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 14:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
    Two minds here. Persistently irritating link placement for sure however this would mean listing a top level hosting domain rather than actually sub domains. Any other views? Cheers --Herby 11:40, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
    Thus far, no legitimate links to that domain, so valid ones could be whitelisted if/when they come up; but then again, with the relatively low frequency that these occur, this may be a better candidate for XLinkBot rather than here ... but, if the specific addresses could be blacklisted, there have been four sites, with two variants each of how they've been linked:
    --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 14:27, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

    Reflecting on this I've decided to list this one in full. It is just possible that there will be a valid sub domain or two & this can be dealt with via whitelisting. In the unlikely even there are a mass of appropriate sites that maybe the global domain should be removed & sub domains blacklisted.  Done thanks --Herby 12:13, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

    greenoptimistic.com + cars-and-trees.com

    Associated domains both adding links to Green articles (always at top of ELs).

    greenoptimistic.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
    cars-and-trees.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

    Edits

    More in-depth report at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#spam.greenoptimistic.com

    Caomhin (talk) 13:06, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

    May be excessive to list for now. IPs warned though which is always a good thing to do. Thanks --Herby 11:32, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

    afii.org

    Please add afii.org and orthodoxjewishbible.org to the blacklist. These are to url's that feature the same junk content repeatedly being added to Bible society. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 21:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

    afii.org: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
    orthodoxjewishbible.org: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
    Fredeee (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)

    At a glance Fredeee seems to have a potential WP:COI and there seems a lot of keyword rich ELs added for those domains. Caomhin (talk) 22:16, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
    I agree with that characterization of Fredeee. In fact he declared his COI and claimed his identity here. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 00:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
    I deleted all the links I could find in the article space per WP:EL. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 00:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

    HELLO - I don't want to be a pest, but is this request going to be approved or denied? I just reverted him again. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 19:59, 16 July 2008 (UTC) Please also check:

    ojbible.org: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 01:33, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


    Spam domains


    Related domains


    Possibly related domains


    Reference
    Blacklisting is a last step since there are reports that Google and other search engines are sometimes consulting our blacklist when evaluating domains as possible spamdexers. In most cases, I blacklist after about four warnings. I see this editor has been blocked briefly. If he spams again (using this or another account), let me know and I'll blacklist his spam domains. --A. B. 22:41, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

    nimp.org

    Any reason why this is not blacklisted already? I'd be bold, but I'm pretty sure I'm not the first one having this idea. :) -- lucasbfr 17:26, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

    It's already blacklisted -- has been for a while. --A. B. 01:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
    The blacklist doesn't affect edit/move summaries anyhow. -Jéské 01:10, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
    I was sure I read a bugzilla mentioning it was now the case. I guess I either was wrong or the change was reverted. Thanks for the clarification :) -- lucasbfr 12:03, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

    oilcarsandmotors.com

    Original report Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#spam.oilcarsandmotors.com_.2B_spam.tenssolution.com.

    Request blacklisting on the basis that the EL is being replaced by those same IPs about once/day. Edit summaries are clear why the EL is removed.

    oilcarsandmotors.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

    Most recent edit by 67.191.3.224 includes removing alternate ELs - ACEA is certainly a valid link, carbibles.com needs a proper check but at a glance it has a fair amount of info and looks reasonable.

    Caomhin (talk) 10:16, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

    Bit early for listing in my view. Warnings etc first would be more appropriate for now. Thanks --Herby 11:34, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

    chaoticplayer.spruz.com

    The IP address 99.242.59.219 repeatedly adds links to this site to Chaotic-related articles , which violates the Misplaced Pages External Links policy on the grounds of requiring registration to view. The process of adding these links involves changing the URL of existing valid links, such as to the official website, while leaving the link text the same or modifying it slightly.

    chaoticplayer.spurz.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

    Ⓔfitu (Ⓣalk) 03:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

    I don't see any links at present (en linksearch), and the cited anonIP editor appears to be doing this only occasionally. Blacklisting the domain feels like over-kill at present...if there's only one problematic editor, easier to try solving the problem at that level first. DMacks (talk) 07:58, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

    spam.celebrityphotos.tv

    celebrityphotos.tv: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
    60.49.85.124 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)

    Wesbite features 2 pages of photo galleries, ELs appeared on the articles for both people featured on website. Expecting further abuse when they add content.

    Caomhin (talk) 06:50, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

    Agreed, of no value to the project.  Done thanks --Herby 07:34, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

    opik.superhosting.bg/~aerobati

    It's the aerobatic teams spammer again. See WikiProject Spam report. MER-C 12:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

     Done --Herby 07:19, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

    phobos.apple.com

    phobos.apple.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

    Can anyone think of any particular reason that anyone would legitimately require to link to items for download at the iTunes store in a Misplaced Pages article? I'm unaware if any particular spamming as such has taken place - but I have noticed (and reverted) people adding these links from time to time. A recent occurrence prompted me to suggest this here. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 07:10, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

    Looking at the en linksearch, I don't see any good uses. Some artist/album/song pages link to them, but "download/buy this item here" doesn't seem within WP:EL (OTOH, it's better than linking to youtube or other sources of copyright-infringing download:). At least one image page uses it as the source for an album-cover image, but I think that could be replaced with a less infringing fair-use version (scan the album instead of taking a third-party's work, or pull from artist's own website to get an authentic original). Blacklist feels a bit pre-emptive right now...I don't see a massive/repeated/spammed use of this site. Could XLinkBot I guess. Or make an effort to remove all such links now and see how rapidly they reappear to justify blacklist (they'd all have to be removed if it's blacklisted anyway). DMacks (talk) 07:49, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
    Okay, no worries. Over the next few days, I'll start going through the linksearch results and removing links from article space (yes, I'll do that first) and see what happens. I'll see about making a request for an XLinkBot addition too. Unless anyone else here can think of a good reason why these iTunes links need to be here... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 18:24, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

    CCNACERTIFICATIONGUIDE.COM

    ccnacertificationguide.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

    Persistent spam on Cisco Career Certifications on various versions of this website link. The link on all small letters were blocked and the spammers continue to add them in this form from different IPs -- Tinu Cherian - 12:00, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

    Agreed &  Done thanks --Herby 08:30, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

    disneylandresort-paris.tk

    Note: this was originally posted at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Spam#spam.disneylandresort-paris.tk

    This is a tricky one. If you follow the link, it appears to work. But, if you have scripts disabled then do a view source on the page, you find that the link uses frames to make the IP look like it remains the one clicked, while it actually calls a referral link at clkuk.tradedoubler.com/click?p(8854)a(1399565)g(214505)

    This same user tried changing the "Official site" link to be the tradedoubler link directly once; then tried hiding it with a minu.ws redirect here (while using a misleading edit summary), and has most recently tries the above URL with a misleading edit summary here. Looking at history, the same user also tried the same trick with a different link in an unrelated article here.

    The user then created a user account, and tried re-inserting the spam link to two different articles (using false edit summaries to try changing the link to the official site) here and here.

    Accounts
    Link
    Other link with same hidden referral trick

    -- - Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:32, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

    I've requested minu.ws to be blacklisted globally on meta, meanwhile. -- lucasbfr 17:52, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

    minu.ws listed on Meta thanks. Here it is the behaviour that makes it blacklistable to me. "Stealing" another url, false edit summaries etc.  Done thanks --Herby 08:22, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

    prs505.com

    Please add prs505.com to the blacklist, due to persistent spam on Sony Reader. Warned the user Ram187 (also logged from 189.141.19.179) numerous times about WP:LINKSPAM and using Misplaced Pages for advertisement of products and web sites. Regardless, the warnings are being erased by the user and spamming goes on. Reezerf (talk) 20:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

    User
    To my interpretation, that article has a lot more external link issues than just that one link. I'm going to purge most of the links now - although others should also review the article. I'm going to purge all links in the EL sections "Content", "Forums", "Third Party/Tools" and "Reviews/Press" as they fail WP:ELNO, WP:NOT#REPOSITORY, and WP:NOT#DIRECTORY. I will add the reviews to the talk page, as they could be useable in ref tags ... but none of the others belong in the article per WP policies and guidelines. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

    The attitude towards the community in these postings leaves me with no doubts.  Done thanks --Herby 08:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

    Proposed removals

    Use this section to request that a URL be unlisted. Please add new entries to the bottom of this section. You should show where the link can be useful and give arguments as to why it should be unlisted. Completed requests should be marked with {{Done}} or {{Notdone}} or other appropriate Indicator then archived.

    meshofficechairs.co.uk

    I request that meshofficechairs.co.uk be removed from the list. I was trying to write the article about the Ergohuman. I included the UK and US suppliers. It let me include the US one but not the UK one. So I am slightly confused as to why it blocked it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niceday2008 (talk • contribs) 09:24, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

    See WikiProject Spam Item (1) / See WikiProject Spam report (2) / checkuser/Case--Hu12 (talk) 04:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
    Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia. Misplaced Pages is NOT a "vehicle for advertising" . Please take a look at the specific requirements of our External Links and Reliable Sources guidelines. I don't think this link meets either guideline.no Declined--Hu12 (talk) 04:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

    letterwhiz.com

    I ask that letterwhiz.com be removed from the list. I spoke to the former site admin and he said we were originally blacklisted because he "didn't understand the rules of Misplaced Pages." He was a junior member on our team and shouldn't have been adding links on the organization's behalf in the first place. He also claims that he believes the Misplaced Pages editor was being malicious with the removal of our link, though we have not been able to verify this internally. Since we provide free letter templates, we feel a link to our site may be of benefit on Misplaced Pages pages that discuss writing business and love letters in particular. Thank you for your consideration.Letterwhiz (talk) 18:43, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

    Typically, we do not remove domains from the spam blacklist in response to site-owners' requests, and this request appears to be made by a role account for Letterwhiz.com, as such this is no Declined. Equally Misplaced Pages is not a place to to promote a site--Hu12 (talk) 04:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

    financemanila.net

    I received an email requesting that financemanila.net be removed from the blacklist. It was added on April 26 by Hu12 (diff). Hu12 has been notified of this although he is on a wikibreak currently so probably won't respond. I'm posting it here because this is the proper venue to request removal. James086 02:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

    Request info. I'll let another admin check for cross wiki (as I am on wikibreak). Thanks James--Hu12 (talk) 04:14, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
    I don't think the site should be removed from the blacklist (the email was also from the site owner). He/they were spamming persistently and it seems they came back to do some more but noticed the site was blocked. James086 12:01, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
    Based on the link placement that took place I do not find a request from the site owner a particularly convincing request I'm afraid. I do not find the site convincing as being suitable for WP either I'm afraid. --Herby 12:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

    No other views so no Declined --Herby 07:15, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

    discoverdalian.com

    I am currently living in China, where wikipedia is routinely blocked as you know. The admin aware of my situation "Hu12" is on an extended wikibreak, so I am not sure the proper procedure to make an appeal. I have to use a proxy to access wikipedia, which is a terribly painful process.

    The situation is this: a couple years ago I added an external link on the "Dalian" entry to my web site (discoverdalian com). While I do offer "for pay" services, my site offers a ton of free public information. It is recognized internationally as the best web site in English for information about the city of Dalian.

    The official city web site is a terrible Chinglish translation, and is designed mostly for foreign investment. I understand that a government asking for money is different from a company. However, my site was a valid and useful external link for a long time.

    Within the expat community here in Dalian, there are many elements fighting for attention. It has become a very dirty business. When my site link and dalianxpat.com were both removed as links from the "Dalian" wikipedia entry, I took this as part of the ongoing attack.

    I undid the deletions, and put effort into keeping the link active in defense. The action of deletion was justified as the removal of spam, but it was not explained or noted with each removal. This happened in a very short time period in early May, and I suspected it was one individual with multiple accounts. The way the matter was dealt with made me feel very confused, because my link had been spam why wikipedia had permitted it to remain for so long.

    I am not willing to accept that my link is spam, but I am willing to concede the point of not having it as an external link.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/June_2008#dalianxpat.com.2C_discoverdalian.com

    If you read the entry about the spam black list, you will note that no warning or explanation was given. A user complained, offered little proof in support, and my url was blacklisted. Not even my user account was banned, just the URL. I was never contacted by an admin, given the chance to explain my side, or simply warned so I would have the chance to surrender.

    I am willing to accept the attack of individuals here in Dalian who want to control all information about the city. However, I will not accept the indignity of having my URL blacklisted on wikipedia. My company has enough media citations to justify its own wikipedia entry. Instead of being so bold, I was content with a simple external link.

    If I ever do decide to submit a full entry, I would like the blacklist issue resolved now. Then if that entry is attacked I can defend it on its own merits, and support of wikipedia guidelines.

    There is obvious evidence of warring over the "Dalian" external links. However, being blacklisted without warning is inappropriate and unfair. The issue was contained only to the link, and the heavy handed way it was deleted within a few week period leaves me a bit shocked. It is enough to make anyone defensive.

    After the admin "Hu12" explained the external link situation, I let the matter drop and did not try to re-add mine or any other links. So I was very surprised and hurt that a few weeks later the URL was blacklisted. It was like I was kicked and gave in, so then why push the matter further? I think this is evidence enough of another individual trying to intimidate and make me appear a complete villain.

    If my reactions at any time along the way were inappropriate, then I sincerely apologize. I understand that being an admin is a tough job and I hope that this decision can be reconsidered. I am routinely censored by the Chinese government, so perhaps I do take it personal when people living in a free and open society try to block me even when I try to make amends.

    You will note in the "Beijing" entry - a city somewhat bigger than Dalian - there is an external link to a tour company. Their page has nothing but prices, not even basic helpful tour information. By the standards my link was judged against, this link should be considered spam and deleted. So why does it remain?

    Beijing External links

    1. Beijing tours (Chinese) >>> http://www.chinatourselect.com/Single-City-Tour/City-Tours/Beijing-Tour-Bj-01.html

    I make this point also to show that I have been singled out as a target by other interests, not over time but in a very short period. If this "Beijing" link is an accepted standard, then I would once again press my case to have my external link reinstated. However, at this point it is my wish and request to simply have the discoverdalian com URL removed from the spam-black list (along with dalianxpat.com).

    Thank you very much for your time, consideration, and prompt reply to this matter.

    Kazkura (talk) 15:51, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


    As a result of this post, the above mentioned links from the Beijing entry were removed. I understand this action, however, they were not blacklisted. Therefore, I once again request resolution of the matter I have presented here. I am not asking to have the URL added as a link, only to have it removed from the ban list.

    Kazkura (talk) 00:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

    That kind of argument is sometimes referred to on Misplaced Pages as OtherStuffExists, and quite often ends up with this kind of result, that the other stuff no longer exists. ;-)
    • I had a look at discoverdalian.com and found some useful and informative content. I don't think it would be suitable for an external link as-is, but conceivably some of the reference material could be used for sourcing. You seem to be OK with not having it as an external link and are more concerned about the honour-related issue of having it on a blacklist, so I would support de-blacklisting that.
    • dalianxpat.com seems to be a sort of combination Web directory/forum with some other information and an article system. I'm not sure the information on it would be useful to us, but if you don't intend to try and spam it into articles then I see no pressing need to ban it altogether; maybe somebody might find something on it we can use.
    Summary: Support de-blacklisting of discoverdalian.com, weaker support for dalianxpat.com (would like to see others' opinions on that one). --tiny plastic Grey Knight ⊖ 15:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

    Closed as no Declined --Herby 07:15, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

    readwriteweb.com

    This is one of the top tech blog and news services in the entire United States, and is a Google News source. It has a strong reputation in the tech field, and is an informational site, not a commercial one. I want to use it for a source. VanTucky 22:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

    The listing hinges around this, this and this. Thanks --Herby 11:31, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

    freencaa09rosters.com

    This is a site created by the EA Sports NCAA Football community to help combat roster thieves like Brian Kaldenberg that steal the legitimate rosters of others and sells them for profit. It's simply a directory of EA Locker accounts and the web sites to the actual roster makers. By allowing the general public to be victim to Kaldenberg's scam, it jeopardizes the ability of roster editing altogether in the NCAA Football series. Ghettoshark (talk) 15:56, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

    There were so many problems with spamming of simlar sounding domain names that another administrator, Hu12, wrote a regex entry into our blacklist to block links to any domain that sounded like one of Kaldenberg's domains. That's what has snared your domain:
    ncaa2009rosters
    Here's Hu12's entry for this blacklisting:
    Given the complexity and history of all this, I'd like to have Hu12 handle any blacklist removal. Unfortunately, he's away for a while due to deaths in his family, so it may be a little while. Please be patient in the meantime. --A. B. 16:30, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

    Thanks for looking into this. Kaldenberg is, shall I say a , who we (the NCAA community) has had the displeasure of dealing with through his spamming of links onto numerous forums and stealing our files. So he has been spamming here as well? Although I wouldn't put it past him... Ghettoshark (talk) 20:07, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


    viartis.net

    The web site appears to have been black listed automatically because it had been added to four Wikipedias. The specific page that was added was viartis.net/publishers/magellan.htm However, there are hundreds of web sites that are on dozens of Wikipedias, quite justifiably, because they are the only or the best source of information on the subject. It is apparent from checking the web page - details of a book on Magellan - that it is not SPAM. It is solely a source of more detailed information on the subjcet. There are comparable pages for specific books on Misplaced Pages, and even entire articles for many books. --Juan de Leon (talk) 15:35, 2 July 2008 (UTC)


    Domain info:
    The viartis.net site-owner appears to be the publisher of the book for which you just created a new article:


    For the big picture, see:
    For additional details, see:
    viartis.net was later returned to the blacklist:
    no Declined --A. B. 03:15, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

    General Tojo concerns solely Parkinson's Disease related subjects. However, this web page viartis.net/publishers/magellan.htm instead concerns a biography of the discoverer Magellan. The only link between the two is the name for billing. However, during discussions on Misplaced Pages, the name of the person listing for billing was conclusively shown to be unrelated to General Tojo. A person listed for billing is often merely an accountant. Such an individual is certainly not an entire publishing company. --Juan de Leon (talk) 07:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

    Precisely which Misplaced Pages rule is supposed to justify the black listing of the web site ? At present, the reason appears to be a very tenuous link between a banned editor who is a Parkinson's Disease biochemist and a publishing company's book by historically known authors that solely concerns the discoverer Magellan. That, even if true, does not appear to come within Misplaced Pages rules at all. The American Nazi party's web site appears on Misplaced Pages, as does that of the Klu Klux Klan, and Osama Bin Laden, all of whose ideologies and web sites appear to be completely acceptable on Misplaced Pages. Yet an innocuous web page concerning a widely available book concerning Magellan, that is on just about every online book retailers web site from Amazon to Barnes and Noble is supposed to be detrimental to Misplaced Pages readers ! There is a massive inconsistency here that has no rational justification. --Juan de Leon (talk) 11:23, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

    pagalkhana.com

    I spoke to the former site admin and he said we were originally blacklisted because he "didn't understand the rules of Misplaced Pages." He was a junior member on our team and shouldn't have been adding links on the organization's behalf in the first place. He also claims that he believes the Misplaced Pages editor was being malicious with the removal of our link, though we have not been able to verify this internally. We have one of the largest video collection of Pakistani & Indian videos. Please unblock us 11:31, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
    —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.190.38.171 (talk • contribs) 00:57, 12 July 2008


    Here's the original entry:
    Typically, we do not remove domains from the spam blacklist in response to site-owners' requests. Instead, we de-blacklist sites when trusted, high-volume editors request the use of blacklisted links because of their encyclopaedic value in support of our encyclopaedia pages. If such an editor asks to use your links, I'm sure the request will be carefully considered and your links may well be removed. --A. B. 01:41, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

    Closed as no Declined per A. B. --Herby 07:17, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

    errorforum.com

    Errorforum is added to blacklist since i added it to the section called error .I think its relevant over there because thats the place where people will get the fix to the most common technical error. Would request to remove it from blacklist and restore the link in error category. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Share2die (talk • contribs) 15:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

    clickok.co.uk/index4.html

    Why clickok.co.uk blacklisted? I want to add it as a link from the Hero's Journey wikipedia pages. This is the best site on the topic I have come across. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.21.43.188 (talk) 08:32, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

    That domain is blacklisted on Meta due to cross-wiki spamming. Based on the history of what appeared to be automated or semi-automated spamdalism, I can't support removing it from the blacklist. --Versageek 09:00, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

    Closed as no Declined per Versageek --Herby 07:17, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

    cais-soas.com

    I'm not at all clear why this is on the blacklist. It describes itself accurately: "The Circle of Ancient Iranian Studies (CAIS) is an independent not-for-profit educational programme, with no affiliation to any political or religious group dedicated to the research, protection, preservation of the pre-Islamic Iranian civilisation.

    CAIS was established in 1998 by Shapour Suren-Pahlav and Oric Basirov (Department of Art and Archaeology), under the name of "Ancient Iranian Civilisation at the School of Oriental and African Studies" (AIC at SOAS) and later changed to "The Circle of Ancient Iranian Studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies" (CAIS at SOAS) of the University of London, to act as a forum for the exchange of information about the art, archaeology, culture and civilisation of Iranian peoples. CAIS no longer has any affiliation with SOAS."

    It's a reliable source so far as I can see (and much better than a lot of sources) yet it can't be used. Doug Weller (talk) 09:27, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

    Hmm, I recall this item .. was discussed not too long ago. Ah, here: m:Talk:Spam_blacklist#cais-soas.com, blacklisted for this reason. There is quite some history with this link, and apparently they routinely violate copyright. I tend to no Declined, and to ask you to either find other sources, and/or whitelist thoroughly checked specific link. --Dirk Beetstra 11:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
    Those are good reasons, I agree with them. I remember when it was a part of the SOAS, it's a shame what has happened to it. Doug Weller (talk) 18:57, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

    Microfinance Gateway

    The Microfinance Gateway website (microfinancegateway.org) is on the spam balcklist. This is a very valuable resource about microfinance that describes itself as: "The Microfinance Gateway is the most comprehensive online resource for the global microfinance community. It includes research and publications, featured articles, organization and consultant profiles, and the latest news, events, and job opportunities in microfinance."

    It has a lot of valuable resources about microfinance -- many of which are not available elsewhere -- and I really do not see why it should be blacklisted. Thank you. Mikel1777 (talk) 16:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

    It has been reported to WT:WPSPAM, with some spamming evidence. Some accounts suggest conflict of interest problems. --Dirk Beetstra 17:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

    Efl-Law.com

    Does anyone know why this site is blacklisted? I was going to list it on the Teaching English as Foreign Language page, when I recieved a blacklist message. The site contains a lot of good information for teachers in Korea re: Korean contracts and labour laws that is hard to find anywhere else, and I feel it would be a good general legal resource for English teachers overseas. Yodaki2 (talk) 07:15, 20 July 2008 (UTC)


    This link was blacklisted on our global blacklist on Meta, not our English-only blacklist. Meta-Wiki (or just "Meta") is a separate project/website for coordinating activities (including spam mitigation) across all 700+ Wikimedia projects.
    I did some research on this domain's history. As far as I can tell, it was only spammed once and the anonymous IP, 221.161.160.201, that spammed the link received no warnings. An editor (not an admin here), Amgine, removed the link and then blacklisted it on the meta blacklist (he was an admin on meta). Unfortunately, Amgine left no comment in the Spam blacklist talk page archives and there is no blacklist log entry. Amgine is also no longer active here or on Meta.
    Amgine also blacklisted a similarly named site, efl-law.org, a few weeks later; that site is totally unrelated and is just a scraper site as far as I can tell.
    Here are related domains that I could find:
    I found that some of these domains had been heavily spammed recently, especially by these accounts:
    This included creating a couple of spam articles:
    I would have liked to have seen more warning given before this domain was originally blacklisted. On the other hand, I am worried that this domain will be abused by the site-owner if this link is removed from Meta's blacklist. Is there a specific page on that site that you have to cite as a reference?
    --A. B. 19:10, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

    Troubleshooting and problems

    This section is to report problems with the blacklist. Old entries are archived

    Discussion

    This section is for other discussions involving the blacklist. Old entries are archived

    Blacklist logging

    Full Instructions for Admins


    Quick Reference

    For Spam reports or requests originating from this page, use template {{/request|0#section_name}}

    • {{/request|213416274#Section_name}}
    • Insert the oldid 213416274 a hash "#" and the Section_name (Underscoring_spaces_where_applicable):
    • Use within the entry log here.

    For Spam reports or requests originating from Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam use template {{WPSPAM|0#section_name}}

    • {{WPSPAM|182725895#Section_name}}
    • Insert the oldid 182725895 a hash "#" and the Section_name (Underscoring_spaces_where_applicable):
    • Use within the entry log here.

    Have added a supplement, a general " how-to of sorts. --Hu12 (talk) 10:31, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

    Note: if you do not log your entries it may be removed if someone appeals and no valid reasons can be found.

    Addition to the COIBot reports

    The lower list in the COIBot reports now have after each link four numbers between brackets (e.g. "www.example.com (0, 0, 0, 0)"):

    1. first number, how many links did this user add (is the same after each link)
    2. second number, how many times did this link get added to wikipedia (for as far as the linkwatcher database goes back)
    3. third number, how many times did this user add this link
    4. fourth number, to how many different wikipedia did this user add this link.

    If the third number or the fourth number are high with respect to the first or the second, then that means that the user has at least a preference for using that link. Be careful with other statistics from these numbers (e.g. good user do add a lot of links). If there are more statistics that would be useful, please notify me, and I will have a look if I can get the info out of the database and report it. The bots are running on a new database, Eagle 101 is working on transferring the old data into this database so it becomes more reliable.

    For those with access to IRC, there this data is available in real time. --Dirk Beetstra 10:41, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

    poking COIBot

    I notice that sometimes people who are not active on IRC need some link reports. Admins here can now add {{LinkSummary|domain}} to User:COIBot/Poke, when COIBot picks up the edit to that page (and it should), it will put the domains into its reporting queue (high priority, which is, only behind waiting XWiki reports) and create a report on the link(s). The first report should be saved within about 5 minutes, if it takes longer than 15 minutes there is probably something wrong, and it may be useful to add the template with the link again (it reads the added part of the diffs (the right column)), or poke me or another person who is active on IRC personally. Hope this is of help. --Dirk Beetstra (en: U, T) 12:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

    P.S. Please don't overuse this function, everything still needs to be saved .. --Dirk Beetstra 12:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
    It had some startup problems, but all seems to work fine now. --Dirk Beetstra 17:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

    archive script

    Eagle 101 said he had one running on meta, is it possible to get it up and going here?--Hu12 10:27, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

    Would be good - Eagle hasn't been working on Meta for a while though & I've not seen anything (there was supposed to be a logging script too!) --Herby 12:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
    • Great news, Ive written a script that can archive this page given the templates that we use, I can create a approved archive along with a rejected archive if people are interested. β 06:51, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
    "Interested" - bit of an understatement there :) Great news - please feel free to help/supply the script. I tend to leave stuff around a week in case anyone shouts or adds more (archives once done should be left alone). How would you handle the "discussion" type bits? Cheers --Herby 09:40, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
    First question, do you want approved and rejected request in separate archives? as for the discussions we could get Misza bot over here for things older than 30 days. β 17:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
    I would think one archive, seperate sections, like it is currently, not sure if the script can do that, but if so, doubt there would be objections in implementation...--Hu12 (talk) 00:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
    There is no simple way of editing sections using the bot. (section editting is evil). it would just be one large archive. β 00:59, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

    MySpace

    Is all of MySpace blacklisted? I just had a speedy deletion where a link could not be posted to the original copyrighted source because of a blacklist. Rmhermen (talk) 19:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

    blog.myspace was blacklisted Per request by Jimbo. what page? --Hu12 (talk) 20:18, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
    I was able to follow the link posted on the page to get to the myspace page; however, a link to it couldn't be added to the speedy deletion template. This seems to be the opposite of the behavior I would expect from the blacklist idea. Rmhermen (talk) 01:14, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
    Blacklisting applies everywhere (including templates), its a blacklist. Next time remove the "http://" or use <nowiki> Tag.--Hu12 (talk) 01:23, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
    Well, that isn't how it worked - the link in the article worked fine. It was only when added to the deletion template that it didn't show up at all - just the this link is blacklisted text. Well I haven't been to recreate the problem. Rmhermen (talk) 13:04, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
    I see what you mean now. The filter will not trip if the link was placed prior to the blacklisting. However if it is removed, re-added or another blacklisted link is added, the filter is triggered. --Hu12 (talk) 13:18, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


    Walled garden of copyright violating websites

    Every year, I have to deal with the individual who posted here making "official sites" for every single actor who appears in the TV series mentioned in that link. I just checked several local articles today, and found the links on them. I even found a link at es.wiki, but the article was a hoax. Now, would it be improper to blacklist all of the links within locally, or could this be a global issue?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

    If the links are being spammed to other projects, it should be blacklisted on meta. Frequently, however, links get added innocently on smaller projects by good faith editors who bring in article text from bigger projects and translate it; we don't blacklist on meta if that's all that's happening.
    I was hoping to look for other domains however I have not had time to finish. I will blacklist these when I get some time.
    --A. B. 18:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
    Before I blacklist any of these, I need some diffs and/or contributions histories showing:
    • Spammer has received multiple warnings (they can be across multiple accounts) (admins typically blacklist after 4 warnings unless there's some egregious behaviour that justifies sooner blacklisting)
      • It needs to be clear that these warned accounts is truly a spammer and not just an innocent editor
    Alternately, if a site presents a clear threat to Misplaced Pages and/or its readers, we may blacklist immediately. Examples:
    • Blatant, willful copyright infringement (I need example comparisons)
    • Malicious code embedded in web pages
    • Phishing
    • Personal attacks
    • Hacked site
    Thanks for your help. --A. B. 19:02, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


    PS, I looked for about 15 minutes and only found this one measly IP with 4 edits (15 months ago) and no warnings:
    --A. B. 19:05, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
    Well, I have removed the links from our project, and removed one of the links from es.wp. It's not really a threat to Misplaced Pages, but the websites are constantly added and are generally galleries of screencaps (and some of the websites violate the GFDL from us).—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

    Why blacklisted?

    Is there a resource that reveals the reason a site was blacklisted? 72.70.248.185 (talk) 22:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

    Other than the page history, I wouldn't know. An admin who frequents this page might know of a centralized location, however. -Jéské 23:09, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
    Depending on which blacklist was used, you should be able to find the reason at one of these:
    Unfortunately, not every entry gets logged (however there's a concerted effort nowadays to follow-up with admins that forget to do this.)
    When looking at the logs, you'll note that many domains have been logged in the format \bexample\.com\b (where example.com is the blacklisted domain). For this reason, I suggest browser-searching the list for "example", not "example.com".
    --A. B. 23:19, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

    hkc22

    91.32.98.162 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)

    83.77.88.187 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)

    Several IPs have been promoting an external website across several wikipedia projects jv ie, promoting commercial services. This behaviour extends back as far as 2005 en - china. An internet search for "hkc22 wiki" turns up lots of edits to the en wiki (270 hits), such as those that have been mirrored by other websites dodgy mirror User A1 (talk) 22:50, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

    Categories:
    MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist Add topic