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 Amalthea (talk | contribs) at 18:11, 5 October 2013 (→abseits-soccer.com: yes). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 18:11, 5 October 2013 by Amalthea (talk | contribs) (→abseits-soccer.com: yes)(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 – 575888260 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.
    Archives
    This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators.
    Please replace this notice with {{no admin backlog}} when the backlog is cleared.


    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.

    firstmovie.in

    firstmovie.in: 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 —rybec 06:10, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

    directory.tradeford.com

    directory.tradeford.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 —rybec 18:52, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

    riocodes.com

    riocodes.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 —rybec 18:41, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

    suzukicycles.org

    suzukicycles.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 Frequently cited, frequently plagiarized. Trove of copyrighted photos, books and text violates WP:COPYLINK and WP:SPS --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:09, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

    Support blacklisting. Werieth (talk) 19:37, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

    icax.co.uk

    icax.co.uk: 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 Appears to be keyword spammed link farm designed for SEO positioning. It's a low value link and scattered around numerous articles related to alternative energy Cantaloupe2 (talk) 12:48, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

    sgs.com

    sgs.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 Sockpuppet SPIs have been adding links to SGS press releases to numerous articles. See Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Schmetterling5/Archive. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:34, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

    angellis.net

    angellis.net: 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 Various editors, mostly anonymous IPs have been using this website as a reference on several articles about prehistoric animals, but, the site is not a reputable source by any stretch, being a fanmade site filled with original research of very little value.--Mr Fink (talk) 16:54, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

    mosler-safe.de / .com

    IP range adding a dubious link to the German website of a "Mosler Safe Company" to various safe-related articles, including Mosler Safe Company, a historically famous American safe manufacturer that went bankrupt in 2001. --McGeddon (talk) 09:25, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

    This spammer is still going a month and a half later. --McGeddon (talk) 17:42, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

    sports-rings.com

    VQuakr (talk) 04:18, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

    obitree.com

    obitree.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

    A minor 'obituary' website which is being spammed into external links sections of articles on recently-deceased as a link to a 'memorial' or similar. There is no indication whatsoever that the site is operating in any way on behalf of relatives of the deceased. Furthermore, material on the website is frequently copied from our own article - without attribution (see for example Princess Fawzia Fuad of Egypt, James Gandolfini,,Jim Kelly (martial artist) etc.). Thus not only is this clear spam, but linking it might encourage circular referencing (it is also incidentally a breach of copyright..). Note that after I warned an initial contributor regarding spamming (see User talk:Ikristin), new accounts have been created for each instance. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:10, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

    Is anything going to be done about this website?: This has been listed for almost two months now, and are still spamming articles on recently-dead persons. The latest trick, which I'd not seen before is to replace a link with one of their own - in this case to findagrave.com, which is arguably spam too, but I think we should be the judge of that, not boosters of a competing (?) website. Note that they are using disposable one-edit accounts - they clearly know what they are doing isn't approved of. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:46, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
     Done. I've also blocked roughly thirty sockpuppets.... Reaper Eternal (talk) 11:59, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

    soulinterviews.com

    IP has been adding the same link since 2012 --Glaisher 16:22, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

    lawrenceindia.com

    lawrenceindia.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

    First it was through the user name Royaltrains (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) which was bloked from editing. After that another username

    adelaide-classifieds.info

    adelaide-classifieds.info: 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

     Done Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:13, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

    maharajasexpresstrains.com

    maharajasexpresstrains.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

    thepalaceonwheels.com

    thepalaceonwheels.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

    spywareloop.com

    Links being spammed

    spywareloop.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

    Sourov0000 (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)

    Diffs

    ... etc. User has been spamming this on dozens of articles today. -- Mesoderm (talk) 22:25, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

    • Well, Mesoderm, thank you for your concern about Spamming. But the actual fact is that I am not related to any kind of Spamming. I am currently working with the virus and Spyware sections and that's why added the references. The reason why I was mentioned is that I have used the link of spywareloop.com on several articles. I am also adding references and information from other websites to Misplaced Pages's (Spyware related articles) within course of time. So, there is no need to see it as Spam. I am well aware of Misplaced Pages's policies and am always against spamming. If what I did makes me spammer, then I think I will have to be even more careful from future. Again thank you for notifying the matter. I really had no intention of spamming and will never have that intention. Thank you all who have used their valuable time to read it. Sourov0000 (talk) 13:50, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

    thealternativepress.com

    thealternativepress.com

    This is nothing more than sites like the Examiner and Associated.As I am checking the WP refs, the links are copied press releases and things plagiarized from other sources.Maybe not all but it looks like it so far. I noticed it popping-up today in a seriously overlinked article Teresa Giudice, and The Real Housewives of New Jersey. I read the linked reference and it was nothing more than reconstituted info. that had already been published by news organizations.(edited to add: it was actually word-forword copied from The Star-Ledger!)Housewifehader (talk) 22:39, 31 July 2013 (UTC) There is no need for this site to be used as a reference here unless it contains original or exclusive content.I hope that I have formatted this correctly;). Here is the example of where the ref. goes as used in these articles : http://thealternativepress.com/towns/west-essex/sections/law-and-justice/articles/nj-housewives-star-theresa-guidice-and-husband-iHousewifehader (talk) 21:51, 31 July 2013 (UTC)Housewifehader (talk) 21:45, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

    just a note to add that since i posted this earlier, I have checked this site out a little closer, and there is plagiarism, copied press releases, broken links, but also it appears that there is some site-original content available. It looks like when they started they focused on an area in North Jersey with local writers-so I am hoping to see another opinion about this, TYHousewifehader (talk) 03:02, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

    gtax.co.uk

    This has been ongoing for some time from different IP adresses, the latest bout of spammers are: 195.144.63.18 (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) 212.203.111.210 (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) 85.3.200.64 (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) (see the diffs from July 30 to August 3).

    Really disruptive spamming since it replaces valid links and information with links to this company. Sjö (talk) 07:38, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

    And just to show that it's been going on for quite some time, Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/gtax.co.uk is from 2009-2010. Sjö (talk) 20:23, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

    shaligram.com

    Google Analytics ID: UA-38591310 - (Track - Report - reverseinternet.com • Meta: Track - Report)

    Spammers

    MER-C 11:53, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

    elitetraveler.com

    Spammers

    Three spamruns from this website that I have noticed. The Banner talk 21:25, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

    Four spamruns (a small one the last time The Banner talk 18:36, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
    • I have no opinion on the editors above, but I do want to report that the magazine itself qualifies as a reliable source according to Misplaced Pages standards. WP:RS. Like all glossy magazines IMHO, they do pander to their advertisers to some degree, but it is a real print magazine with reporters, editors and fact checkers.--Nixie9✉ 23:26, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

    Morning277's sources

    investmentunderground.com

    investmentunderground.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 This "source" is only used by the Morning277 a.k.a. Wiki-pr.com spammers. Examples found in a big box of junk:

    As I write, there are 20 of these links in the article space of the English Misplaced Pages, and 30 elsewhere. This outfit has multiple people working on insertion of new articles, restoration of deleted articles, and maintenance of their preferred content in articles. I understand that the links are normally removed before blacklisting. If this is approved, I'm willing to remove the links from the English Misplaced Pages afterward.

    —rybec 00:36, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

    There's no requirement for links to be removed before blacklisting. Before or after, it doesn't matter. Isn't this one of those sites that these socks are removing anyway to avoid detection? ~Amatulić (talk) 23:42, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
    I don't have a diff that shows them removing this particular one, but it's one of the sites I listed at Misplaced Pages:Long-term_abuse/Morning277#Habitual_behavior. There are now 13 12 articles that contain it and 24 other pages . I have a suspicion that the PR company arranges for stories to be written about its clients on the Investment Underground site; then the Investment Underground story lends an appearance of credibility to the Misplaced Pages article. New page patrollers see an article written in fluent English with inline references, and leave it alone. After examiner dot com was blacklisted, this outfit started just writing "Examiner" without providing a URL, so I'm not sure blacklisting will be entirely effective, but it may help. —rybec 23:56, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
    There are so many publications called "Examiner" that if the URL is missing, it's probably a decent sock detection signal.
    I'm uneasy about blacklisting a source that isn't unambiguously being used for abuse. This seems more indirect, citing possibly-paid-for articles on investmentunderground as a means to preserve articles on Misplaced Pages posted by the PR firm. Needs some discussion. It might be an easier decision if this site had little editorial oversight like examiner.com, but I'm not sure that's the case. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:21, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
    If there are good faith uses for this source, but most links by new accounts are spam would this be a good Xlinkbot candidate? VQuakr (talk) 01:09, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

    (edit conflict)In the past, the Morning277 editors always became autoconfirmed before posting their articles. Recently, they've stopped doing that, but I'm sure they wouldn't mind going back to their previous behavior. If I understand correctly, XLinkBot does not affect autoconfirmed editors. Below, I contend that good-faith use of this URL occurs in at most one article on the English Misplaced Pages.

    The Misplaced Pages search says there are 13 results, but only shows 12 articles on the results page. I assume it's because one article contains two Investment Underground citations.

    User:Sublimeharmony/sandbox11 contains 75 distinct articles; of those, 17 linked to this site (22.6%). Of the 4,306,170 articles on the English Misplaced Pages, only 12 link to Investment Underground (0.00027%). Arithmetically, there's not much ambiguity, even if all 12 articles were unrelated to the spamming PR firm. However, I believe that all or nearly all were placed on Misplaced Pages by that PR firm. If the relationship between Investment Underground and the company placing these Misplaced Pages is what I suspect it is, it should be obvious why they would choose not to disclose that. For further evidence, look at the timing of when stories appear on investmentunderground.com and vatalyst.com, and the first appearance of the Misplaced Pages article.

    Here are the 12 articles which cite Investment Underground, and some of the reasons why I think they're all products of the same company:

    1. David Stewart (alternative medicine) cites Vatalyst (one of only 8 articles which do), CNN Ireport, an Andrew Moran article in Digital Journal
    2. Banc De Binary An article about its CEO is in User:Sublimeharmony/sandbox11 .
    3. Citadel EFT Its creator did minor edits to existing articles until autoconfirmed, pasted this article into a sandbox , and abandoned his account the same day he moved the article to the main space on the English Misplaced Pages. These habits were all characteristic of Morning277 prior to mid-July 2013.
    4. EFans (social network) This one is a little ambiguous, I admit. The editing habits and writing style differ from Morning277's usual. I do notice that it cites www.business2community.com, another of Morning277's preferred sources, and the refnames are two-letter, capitalized abbreviations. Also, it's about an obscure Web site (its Alexa rank is 415,792 globally and 149,308 for India). The efans.com domain is registered to someone in La Jolla, California. Morning277 activity has been seen from the San Diego area; La Jolla is a suburb of San Diego.
    5. Enigma NMS Cites California Business Journal and Business 2 Community, two more of Morning277's habitual sources. Had a minor edit by Tabithamuiru (talk · contribs), a Morning277 account which re-spammed Cleeng as Cleeng (Company)—see .
    6. Key Realty School LLC Previously spammed at Key Realty School, now recreated under a different name—a hallmark of Morning277.
    7. Linode Also cites California Business Journal, Technorati and Yahoo Voices, which are among Morning277's preferred sources. Heavily edited by Bluesman3145 (talk · contribs) and Afolson (talk · contribs), both blocked as MooshiePorkFace (talk · contribs) socks. MooshiePorkFace is believed to work with Morning277.
    8. Search Engine People another of the 8 that cites Vatalyst, just like David Stewart (alternative medicine) and Zorpia
    9. SmartFile (company) Also cites an Andrew Moran article in Digital Journal, just like Tim Grayem and David Stewart (alternative medicine).
    10. Tim Grayem Also cites an Andrew Moran article in Digital Journal, just like David Stewart (alternative medicine) and SmartFile (company).
    11. W Athletic (talent agency) Previously spammed at W Athletic, now recreated under a different name with unnecessary disambiguation—a hallmark of Morning277.
    12. Zorpia Is another of the 8 that cites Vatalyst, just like David Stewart (alternative medicine) and Search Engine People.

    To belabor a point, there are 4.3 million articles on the wiki, of which 12 cite Investment Underground and 8 cite Vatalyst, with an overlap of 3 articles that cite both! For that to happen by chance is like having three people in your city who each won a lottery grand prize, got struck by lightning and' were bitten by sharks. Also, for two of them, there were stories by Andrew Moran in Digital Journal (he's not their only writer). It's as though the same shark came back and gave two of those people a second bite. It would make sense if the three subjects had a great deal in common, or if Investment Underground, Vatalyst, and Andrew Moran all produced a huge volume of stories—but they don't. The assumption that they all have the same publicist, who has an "in" with the ostensible journalists, is the only reasonable explanation.

    Another thing I notice is that the domains wiki-pr.com, vatalyst.com, investmentunderground.com and cabusinessjournal.org are all registered with Godaddy and the whois information is private. While Godaddy is a very popular registrar, this is suspicious by itself.

    The only article where I see this site used that isn't very obviously a Morning277 write-up is the EFans article, and I think I've shown it's reasonable to have suspicion about that one. I just don't see this site used by non-spammers. Morning277 is hardly likely to send in a signed affidavit disclosing its relationship with Investment Underground, Vatalyst, and the California Business Journal. —rybec 02:50, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

    vatalyst.com

    vatalyst.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 The rationale is the same as for investmentunderground.com above.

    This site was referenced in 22 Sublimeharmony articles:

    This is currently used as a reference in 8 articles on the English Misplaced Pages:

    1. IDrive Inc. has two Vatalyst citations. Was created by 178Tint (talk · contribs), an editor in good standing.
    2. Search Engine People discussed in investmentunderground.com section
    3. Zorpia discussed in investmentunderground.com section
    4. Rivalus also cites Digital Journal, CNN Ireport, Yahoo Voices
    5. National Academy of Future Physicians and Medical Scientists also cites Business 2 Community twice, Yahoo Voices, CNN Ireport, and California Business Journal
    6. David Stewart (alternative medicine) discussed in investmentunderground.com section
    7. Krinos Foods Canada Ltd also cites California Business Journal, Business 2 Community, Yahoo Voices, Examiner
    8. Geoffrey Edelsten Philanthropy section with citations to one Vatalyst story was added by Phrenology (talk · contribs), an editor in good standing.

    —rybec 07:48, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

    dividendkings.com

    dividendkings.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 The rationale is the same as for investmentunderground.com and vatalyst.com above.

    This site was referenced in Sublimeharmony articles:

    1. Sollensys
    2. Echopass
    1. Security Innovation
    2. Loyaltyworks
    1. Oren Laurent
    2. NewYorkStay.com
    1. Rev. Fr. Emmanuel Lemelson
    2. American Writers and Artists Inc.

    It is not currently used in articles on the English Misplaced Pages, although there are three sandboxes which refer to it:

    1. User:Alcedine/sandbox about Casino.org, sourced from Dividend Kings, Yahoo Voices, Vatalyst, pameladeter's blog and a Digital Journal piece by Andrew Moran as its only sources.
    2. User:Jvn mht/sandbox about QuoteWizard, a previous Morning277 subject;

    Jvn mht (talk · contribs) has been blocked. The draft cites Vatalyst, Dividend Kings and Yahoo Voices as its only sources.

    1. User:Gem 1981/sandbox about TestCountry, a previous Morning277 subject. It cites Vatalyst, Dividend Kings and a Digital Journal piece by Andrew Moran as its only sources.

    Besides the pameladeter blog, all the sources for these three sandboxes come from the short list I posted at Misplaced Pages:Long-term_abuse/Morning277. —rybec 15:51, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

    cabusinessjournal.org

    cabusinessjournal.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 The rationale is the same as for investmentunderground.com, vatalyst.com and dividendkings.com above.

    This site was referenced in Sublimeharmony articles:

    1. ModelManagement.com
    2. Brosix
    3. NewYorkStay.com
    4. Sweet Couch
    5. Emmanuel Lemelson
    6. American Writers and Artists Inc.

    The uses on the English Misplaced Pages include many of the same articles I mentioned in regard to investmentunderground.com, vatalyst.com and dividendkings.com. You'll see those sites cited along with this one. All the uses look like Morning277's work, or discussion of it. Right now it's in only six main-space articles:

    —rybec 19:00, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

    celebritiesheight.com

    celebritiesheight.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

    This website is currently being spammed by numerous hit 'n run accounts. So far I have caught:

    1. Sushmaatamang (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)
    2. Rupalithapalia (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)
    3. Pramodkumarshah (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)
    4. Dilkaparamda (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)
    5. Bidurchhetri (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)
    6. Durgalamsal (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)
    7. Rashmiupreti (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)
    8. Pimaggiea (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)
    9. Putanakamatyadav (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)
    10. Amranyadampo (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)
    11. Millitochulati (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)
    12. Bakanatamrakar (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)
    13. Laymetamang (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)
    14. Deepikasonnet (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)
    15. Angeelarai (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)
    16. Sumeetbohara (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)
    17. Putanilamba (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)
    18. Pitleungama (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)
    19. Mayakobarima (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)
    20. Phirwohiraat (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)

    Looking at the search results when searching for the domain, there are probably at least 30 more accounts spamming the website. Nymf (talk) 17:06, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

    1. Melepatisujata (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)
    2. Dilipamemorous (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)
    3. Pimariaya (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)
    4. Prichardshahi (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)
    5. Stangeprasad (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)
    6. Licianasharma (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)
    7. Kritikabhanddari (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)
    8. Pimaryenma (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)
    9. Gregorykarki (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)
    10. Lawatipranami (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)
    11. Amrtinahipun (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)
    12. Durchanarawat (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)
    13. Sundarshyamgale (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)
    14. Saritamulepatii (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)
    15. Thapadeepika (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)
    16. Prabhuadhikary (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)
    17. Pkhannagarama (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)
    18. Colemansuzata (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)
    19. Baralanita (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)
    20. Douglassumeet (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)
    21. Umakantana (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)
    22. Rosiemai (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)
    23. Pitambarlama (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)
    24. Pukartarahaume (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)
    25. Anishwaglee (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)
    26. Miswahkumaratankga (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)
    27. Trishakapoor (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)
    28. Surdarshanarlama (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)
    29. Chumanshinggurung (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)
    30. Unnatik (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) -- stale for CU
    31. Amrittas (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) -- stale for CU

    SPI filed. MER-C 04:06, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

     Done Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:36, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

    fncy.it

    fncy.it: 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

    is a 302 redirect to bitly.com

    —rybec 07:01, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

     Defer to Global blacklist URL shorteners go on the global blacklist. I've posted a request there. MER-C 07:53, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

    Morning277 subjects

    These sites are being promoted by a publicity agency, banned from Misplaced Pages, which has been posting articles about them. After an article is deleted and the poster blocked, a new article with similar contents is posted from a different account, almost always under a different title. Since they keep using new accounts and new article titles, account blocking and page protection haven't been entirely effective.

    newyorkstay.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

    www.youtube.com/user/newyorkstaycom: 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

    www.justiceforall.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

    www.kulaw.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

    4cabling.com.au: 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

    www.aasted.eu: 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

    www.alsbridge.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

    www.awaionline.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

    www.bizible.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

    —rybec

    epnrstatus.co.in

    epnrstatus.co.in: 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

    • Regularly added to articles relating to Indian Railways, often by replacing legitimate links in the articles with the spamlink (both external links and reflinks, with official Indian Railways links being the prime target; sample diffs: ,, , , ). The spamlinks are added by IP-users who all geolocate to India, using a new IP each time. Thomas.W 10:57, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

    hipromtech.com

    hipromtech.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

    www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k

    princeton.edu: 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

    • The site is not reliable and should not be used in Article space per WP:CIRCULAR. This is clone of Misplaced Pages (every real page there says "The article content of this page came from Misplaced Pages and is governed by CC-BY-SA."). Some wikipedia editors may think that site is good as RS (it is in google's top and the domain is .edu), but it isn't and there should be some way to say that the link is not correct to be added to the Wiki.
    • Recent example: diff
    • Currently there are 76 links to the site, some are from Article space: :
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/1924_Summer_Olympics.html is linked from Albert Séguin
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/2D_computer_graphics.html is linked from 2D computer graphics
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Abba_Eban.html is linked from Abba Eban
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Adair_County,_Missouri.html is linked from Grand River (Missouri)
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Area_rule.html is linked from Sears–Haack body
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Banba.html is linked from LÉ Banba (CM11)
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Ben_Bova.html is linked from Ben Bova
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Bhavani.html is linked from Bhavani Peth
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Biface.html is linked from Hand axe
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Brightness_temperature.html is linked from Brightness temperature
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Bushyhead,_Oklahoma.html is linked from Dennis Bushyhead
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Byng,_Oklahoma.html is linked from Julian Byng, 1st Viscount Byng of Vimy
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/CDC_6600.html is linked from CDC 6600
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Camel_(band).html is linked from Camel (band)
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Camel_(band).html is linked from The Snow Goose (album)
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Critical_theory.html is linked from Critical theory
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Ctesiphon.html is linked from Iwan
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Du_hast.html is linked from Burkenburg
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Francesco_Redi.html is linked from Francesco Redi
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Jean_le_Rond_d_Alembert.html is linked from Louis-Camus Destouches
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Lagari_Hasan_%C3%87elebi.html is linked from Lagâri Hasan Çelebi
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Language_game.html is linked from Language game
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Local_Government_Areas_of_Australia.html is linked from Local Government Area
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Lord_Peter_Wimsey.html is linked from Lord Peter Wimsey
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Mohammed_Deif.html is linked from Mohammed Deif
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Mystic_Records.html is linked from Mystic Records
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Noise_weighting.html is linked from Psophometric weighting
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Phonograph_cylinder.html is linked from Early classical guitar recordings
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Pimsleur_language_learning_system.html is linked from Pimsleur method
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Pope_John_XXI.html is linked from History of Roman Catholicism in Portugal
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/QuarkXPress.html is linked from QuarkXPress
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Reconquista.html is linked from History of Roman Catholicism in Portugal
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Record_producer.html is linked from Executive producer
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Sacraments_of_the_Catholic_Church.html is linked from Catholic Church
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Simpson_s_paradox.html is linked from Edward H. Simpson
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Smokey_Robinson.html is linked from North End, Detroit
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Sunk_costs.html is linked from Sunk costs
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/The_Chemical_Brothers.html is linked from Alleyn's School
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Transport_in_Barbados.htm is linked from Transport in Barbados
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Tsui_Hark.html/ is linked from List of University of Texas at Austin alumni
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Wall.html is linked from Wall
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Warren,_Arkansas.html is linked from Warren, Arkansas
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Wis%C5%82awa_Szymborska.html is linked from Ironic precision
      • www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Yom_Kippur_War.html is linked from United Nations Security Council Resolution 338
    PS Actually, there are another runs of "tmve/wiki100k" on different sites (google for "tmve/wiki100k" site:wikipedia.org), e.g. http://www.sccs.swarthmore.edu/users/08/ajb/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Bavarii.html http://www.sccs.swarthmore.edu/users/08/ajb/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Potentiometer.html and they are not only in en-wiki (move to meta spam list or create some filters for wiki100k?) `a5b (talk) 00:52, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
    I don't know where the links came from but that site is benign -- it's an experiment being done by a grad student at Princeton. For more information, see these web pages:
    http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~achaney/papers/ChaneyBlei2012.pdf
    I suggest emailing her at http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~achaney/email.html before any blacklisting to give her a heads up.
    Her work could be very useful to Misplaced Pages and the Wikimedia Foundation in the long-term.
    That said, we don't need any of these links since they circle back to our own content.
    --A. B. 16:23, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
    I suggest she get in touch with WikiProject Research
    --A. B. 16:25, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
    That Wikiproject looks moribund when I look at it closer. It looks like there's very active support and discussion of various research projects on Meta-Wiki at meta:Research:Index. I'd hate to see a diligent researcher run afoul of what might look BITE-y to an outsider.
    --A. B. 16:34, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
    A. B., the main problem with this site is that: it takes texts from Misplaced Pages and republish them. This is allowed to copy text from wiki, but what is not allowed (per WP:CIRCULAR) - is to used wikipedia texts as references (wikipedia is not Reliable source, so does any copy of wikipedia). E.g. If there is link to http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Pope_John_XXI.html in some article, we should replace it with Pope_John_XXI; and if such link is in <ref> we should replace this link with {{fact}}. I propose to add this site to spam list only to limit the efforts of replacing links to the princeton with {{fact}}. With site included to spam list, there will be no new links to the site added by good faith users who may think that something from `.edu` is always reliable..... Ok, there is actually no need to include her site into spam-list, but we should delete all links to her site and periodically recheck the Linksearch. `a5b (talk) 21:39, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
    As the creator of these problematic pages, I'm sorry--I just became aware that this is an issue. Please let me know what I can do to help fix it or prevent bad citations in the future. I won't be following the discussion here, but please email me if you'd like me involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Absonant (talk • contribs) 13:23, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

    www.historyofnations.net

    historyofnations.net: 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 – This site uses Misplaced Pages content without attribution and is placed into the External links section of about 100 'History of ...' articles. Abductive (reasoning) 20:40, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

    sourcesecurity.com

    Spammers

    Long term, persistent spamming on many IPs and users - above is a partial list of IPs and accounts. Main spam URL is sourcesecurity.com, but thebigredguide and yogawizard show some overlap in accounts. - MrOllie (talk) 18:37, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

    thewebminer.com

    scrape4me.com

    500music.com

    ebscohost\.com(\.|.*(pdfviewer|EbscoContent)) - block unusable EBSCOHOST links

    Here's a specific suggestion: 

    ebscohost\.com(\.|.*(pdfviewer|EbscoContent))     #Block 3 kinds of unusable EBSCOHOST links but allow permalinks: Match proxies: there's a literal "." after "com", and temporary session links, which contain pdfviewer or EbscoContent

    (This is a consolidation of these two simpler regexes: 

    ebscohost\.com.*pdfviewer          #Block unusable ] links but allow permalinks
ebscohost\.com\.                   #Match proxies, which is where it's not the end of the hostname - there's a literal "." after "com".

    )


    Misplaced Pages has many apparently dead-on-arrival links (like this intended to be to PDFs of the form ebscohost.com...pdfviewer...: All 7 of the 323 pages containing ebscohost and pdfviewer] I looked at had dead EBSCO links. These are NOT links that hit a paywall (like this. Rather, they bring up 404-like server error messages, and did from the day they were added; they're non-persistent URLs.

    A second problematic type of EBSCO link are proxied URLs, like the three added by a user's (sole ever) edit that are of the form hxxp://0-web.ebscohost.com.sculib.scu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=@sessionmgr13&vid=4&hid=13. (Note the bold portion!) These links work ONLY for subscribers that are ALSO at SCU. We shouldn't allow such links, and the blacklist (or a similarly functioning parallel system) would be a good solution.

    I've noticed that EBSCO staff has been heavily editing their own article. I solicited assistance, hoping they'd be available, willing, and able to help fix these links or suggest ways to deal with them systematically. note posted; no response. What EBSCOhost calls permalinks, like http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ulh&AN=37698669&site=ehost-live&scope=site are acceptable, and so I've designed a regex that allows the permalinks but forbids the non-persistent URLs.

    Research suggests it's not possible to convert the non-persistent URLs to persistent URLs using the data in the former. --Elvey (talk) 21:26, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

    The second problem is the use of a proxied URL, ie, the link points to a institution's proxy server such as sculib.scu.edu. This is not specific to ebscohost - it happens with links to other subscription databases too. A search for "ezproxy", for example, will bring up hundreds of such links. They are a bad thing. Nurg (talk) 08:39, 12 June 2013 (UTC) (reposted)
    I am tempted to see these sites as redirects, which will be location-dependent whether they work. I would consider that these should typically be converted to direct links to the object (within educational institutions, one can generally use a web-proxy to get to literature - a direct link would either be the link on the server where the literature resides, or the DOI. <snip> Links through proxy servers have no place whatsoever. I am somewhat tempted to say that these need blanket blacklisting on meta, as they could possibly be abused to circumvent other blacklistings (for a relatively open proxy), and serve no function whatsoever to most readers except for the (few) ones that have access through the proxy - I doubt even if the url can be understood well enough to be able to figure out a real link from it. It is however going to be very obnoxious for the users that in good faith insert the proxy url they copy from their web-browser and then they can't save, and one could think of cases where it is appropriate (if information is only available to people who can pass the proxy and no-where else in the world, it could still a good reference for certain information - think of it of a book of which the single copy is in an nearly inaccessible library (the library in the Vatican), it is still verifiable by proxying through people who do have access to the library (ask the pope)).
    Note, that with creative regex rule-writing, we could blacklist the two 'bad' examples of Nurg (the non-persistent link and the institution proxies), still enabling good ones (the permalinks). --Dirk Beetstra 09:30, 12 June 2013 (UTC) (reposted, indented, and 1 sentence snipped)
    We use the blacklist to limit examiner.com links, because they generally fail RS, so I think it's appropriate that we add regexes for the impermanent URLs. (Arguably it would be better to have a similarly functioning parallel system with its own error messages handle sites like examiner.com and this ebsco problem, but in the meantime, I say let's put in regexes to handle them.) I also match the ebscohost proxy URLs, but not by matching on 'ezproxy', because some of the ebscohost proxy URLs don't contain 'ezproxy'. (It could be considered as part of a future proposed blacklist addition.) Beetstra (talk · contribs) suggested blanket blacklisting on meta be considered, but at meta, though I see these links on other sites - e.g 'fr.', I was told firmly, "Deal with it at the local wiki level." (Discussion at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Spam_blacklist&oldid=5798048#Unusable_EBSCOHOST_links.) --Elvey (talk) 21:26, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
    Well? Do we need to run a bot to remove all the extant links first, or is there more that is holding this addition back? --Elvey (talk) 01:58, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
    3000 links to improve in one go - seems like a good idea to me, yes!--Elvey (talk) 02:17, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
    Given the fiasco of the many editors pissed off by the actions of Cyberpower678 (talk · contribs)'s bot Cyberbot II (talk · contribs), a non-spam blacklist (see the big text above) is urgently needed. If one of Cyberpower678's bots is set up to handle entries on this list appropriately, it would be appropriate to ad the EBSCOHOST regex to it, and move the examiner.com and petition regexes to it.--Elvey (talk) 09:13, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
    Many? Don't see that yet. Elvey, most of the links we block are blocked because they are/were spammed (examiner.com was spammed and is a spam-problem, for most of the petition sites, that is also true - it is a spam problem .. your remark regarding that is wrong), we do not block because we don't like links, or because they are unusable or because they are unreliable sources .. Nonetheless, your suggestion to have a second similar list might have merit, but that is a mediawiki developer problem that should be solved at the bugzilla level .. and I do not have much hope since we are waiting for several blacklist-related 'bugs' (improvements) for years already. --Dirk Beetstra 09:26, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
    Thanks, I see what you're saying. Here is a good example of the problem: Luke (talk · contribs) is ADAMANT: "If something gets tagged as being on the spam blacklist, I will remove it, pure and simple." He's saying he's NOT going to examine the link, or attempt to repair or replace it. He's going to ASSUME the blacklist maintainers are making sure that the blacklist pretty much only blocks spam (like the spamhaus SBL and XBL maintainers do, if you're familiar with those lists). But this blacklist is more like some of the more aggressive blacklists that are willing to include entries that can be expected to cause considerable collateral damage. And that wouldn't be so bad if this blacklist was not marketed/described as pretty much only blocking spam. I'm willing to bet that the typical editor who tries to add a legitimate reliable source that is blacklisted collateral damage ends up not adding it, because we don't have multiple lists. The bot and the blacklist description pages are wrong to say the link Luke removed was spam; he was misled. The solution isn't to threaten to block everyone who does what he intends to do. It's to fix the list by splitting it. ASAP. We should still be blocking no-ip.com and examiner.com by default. Just not with this list. Roughly how many have I seen/do I think have expressed/do I think are upset because of the bot? Me? Around 6/?/60+, based on the 6. What about you? Is effecting a new list a developer problem at all? I would expect replicating the existing system and changing the names of a few things would be relatively trivial task for the right person (an admin, not a developer), compared to a real development project, such as a significant enhancement. Many good examiner.com-type links were not blocked because the links were a spam problem, but rather because they might have been one. But yes, I see your point - the examiner.com domain was blocked because it is a spam problem, I stand corrected. (BTW, is there a working 'spam' definition for use here? I usually refer to the definitions like the ones spamhaus proffers, tweaked to apply to this medium. I guess I'll go look for that …) I remember the first time I tried to save an edit and couldn't, and for the longest time had no idea why Misplaced Pages wouldn't let me save the edits I'd made to an article, which included adding an examiner.com source to it. The error messages had me thoroughly confused - and I'm knowledgeable about spam blacklists - but I still got the most pathetic and inscrutable error messages, and had no idea why Misplaced Pages wouldn't let me save the edits i'd made to an article. I have just gone through the same motions, which confirmed what I have seen others' comments suggest: the error messages shown to legit editors are still a pretty serious FAIL, though they are better than I remember. I recall they were worse than nothing, worse than useless. For no-ip.com links, the error message is still awfully misleading, as it describes my only options as:
    • If you feel the link is needed, you can:
      • Request that the entire website be allowed, that is, removed from the local or global spam blacklists (check both lists to see which one is affecting you).
      • Request that just the specific page be allowed, without unblocking the whole website, by asking on the spam whitelist talk page.

    This is unhelpful. The appropriate action is to request that the subdomain, rwservices.no-ip.info be whitelisted. It needs to be whitelisted. The error message is **misleading**. 

    --Elvey (talk) 21:57, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

    PS: From current discussions: Surely you admit this listing wasn't because of a spam problem: 

    \bjustjared\.buzznet\.com\b # Kanonkas # Gossip site/copyvio issues/speculation/not a reliable source used wrongly

    Kaun Banega Crorepati‎ spam links

    The above websites have been repeatedly spamlinked from Kaun Banega Crorepati (an Indian version of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?). They all falsely claim to be official KBC websites, or else the users inserting links to them falsely claim or imply that they are official KBC websites. As far as I can tell the websites are operated by scammers trying to trick members of the public into paying fees (via PayPal) to register as a contestant. See MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/November 2012#AdSense pub-6522157377920590 for a previous report. Some or all of these sites are already on XLinkBot's revert list, but some particularly persistent spammers are using autoconfirmed accounts (e.g., Neel12mani (talk · contribs)) to insert the links. Note that the blogspot domains exist on many TLDs (.in, .de, .com, etc.). —Psychonaut (talk) 17:52, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

    cinemastan.com

    Adsense google_ad_client = pub-5496038806164820 (Track - Report - reverseinternet.com • meta: Track - Report)
    Google Analytics ID: UA-24829816 - (Track - Report - reverseinternet.com • Meta: Track - Report)

    Spammers

    MER-C 10:48, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

    All are  Done. Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:55, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

    cuttinglet.com

    cuttinglet.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

    The only edits by Ndixit92 (talk · contribs) have been to spam links to this questionable, unreliable blog through citations. ViperSnake151  Talk  18:40, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

     Not done. Talk to the user. Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:37, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

    SGcafe.com

    sgcafe.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 An unreliable source that is growing in popularity (A little above 50 articles used it in July, and now over 100 I believe). Discussed shortly at Reliable sources board and was considered unreliable. It is a blog with four writers and no mention of editorial department. Translations of interviews can not be confirmed for accuracy or source 1, uses other blogs as references 2, and violates copyright restrictions 3. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 20:52, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

    Additionally it is being used for references and sourcing for completely unrelated items seemingly solely to drive up numbers to the site for certain editors. A popular site but not being used constructively by multiple editors. Canterbury Tail talk 11:39, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

    sentuamsg.com

    These URLs are being spammed by 86.20.42.223 (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) all over the place. Diffs: . --benlisquareT•C•E 05:56, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

    kuaiyilicai.com

    kuaiyilicai.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 : Potential scam website purported to be a money exchange website currently being spammed by Fanxin92 (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). User has been making URL additions in a bait-and-switch manner (e.g. replacing official government website URLs with this spam URL). Diffs: . --benlisquareT•C•E 06:09, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

     Done That totally looks legitimate. Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:50, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

    pinkangelsmokes.com

    Repeated additions of this - apparently, as I can't check it from a work machine - porn site link by at least 3 4 5 IP users I have been able to ID (only other reference I could find in a search was at Talk:Smoking fetishism requesting it be removed from the article in May of this year). User(s) using formatting in a - poorly executed - attempt at deception to masquerade it as a link to a government survey. besieged 00:51, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

    raveguide.co.uk

    raveguide.co.uk: 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 Being added by user of the same name. The user has been reported as a promotional user, not (yet) as a vandal. Fiddle Faddle 22:45, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

    Digitaldreamdoor.com

    digitaldreamdoor.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 This website accepts user contributions without editorial oversight which means they fail the WP:Reliable sources guideline. Anybody can make a list of their favorites and publish it—a lot of what we see on Misplaced Pages is in the form of "100 Greatest Fusion Artists" or similar. The website has been added as an external link or a reference to Misplaced Pages many, many times, often by multiple good-faith users rather than by a single spamming account. If we blacklist the website the unreliable references and links will stop. Examples of this website being used as a reference or an external link:
    Back in 2007, Special:Contributions/65.2.112.232 added Digital Dream Door to seven articles in every one of his seven edits—an example of spamming.
    A discussion about this general issue can be see at Misplaced Pages:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#digitaldreamdoor.com. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 16:03, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

    Completed Proposed additions

    blogintomystery.com

    See WikiProject Spam report. Of the 30 or so links I have removed, all of them were added by that /17. MER-C 08:09, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

     Done Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:14, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

    easybusinessposters.com

    Google Analytics ID: UA-23731192 - (Track - Report - reverseinternet.com • Meta: Track - Report)

    Spammers

    See WikiProject Spam report MER-C 06:52, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

     Done Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:21, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

    42.com

    42.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 Site redirects to malware, per Norton, added to Phrases from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (diff). - Pointillist (talk) 20:37, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

     Defer to Global blacklist .. if it damages the readers, it is of interest to all of mediawiki to block this. --Dirk Beetstra 05:49, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

    Proposed removals

    Use this section to request that a URL be unlisted. Please add new entries to the bottom of this section.

    Requests from site owners or anyone with a conflict of interest will be declined. Otherwise, follow these steps to post a properly-formatted request:

    • Familiarize yourself with the reasons why a site was blacklisted. Look at MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/log to see who blacklisted the link and when, and the reason given for blacklisting.
    • At the beginning of your request, include the domain in a {{link summary}} template (remove the http:// and www from the domain). This provides tools to find more information on the domain. For example, * {{Link summary|example.com}} results in:
    • When previewing your post with an included {{link summary}}, you will find links to a COIBot-report ('COIBot'), linksearches on en ('Linksearch en'), and tracked discussions ('tracked' and 'advanced'). If the log did not provide sufficient information on why a link was blacklisted, these links often yield more information.
    • Explain how the link can be useful on Misplaced Pages. Referencing a discussion at WP:RSN can be helpful.
    • Explain your reasoning why the blacklisting is not necessary anymore.
      • The bar for blacklisting is whether a site was spammed to Misplaced Pages, or otherwise abused, not whether the content of the site is 'spammy' or unreliable. Please indicate why you expect that that abuse has stopped.

    Providing this information often helps in a faster handling of the request.

    Once you have added your request, please check back here from time to time to get the outcome or to answer any additional questions. We will not email you or otherwise notify you about your request, and if no answer is received to a question, the request will be considered abandoned.

    Administrators: Completed requests should be marked with {{done}}, {{not done}}, or another appropriate indicator, then archived.

    bvinewbie.com

    bvinewbie.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 Good day. Looked through the information, but I can't see why this guide is on the blacklist. I believe that it contains unique information about the British Virgin Islands, ones that can't be found anywhere else. For example information on immigration and work permits.

    Rentarasta.com

    rentarasta.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 Not understanding why this one in particular is on the list or even where to find out on my own. There is a screenshot archive of an article here that I want to reference. Docucopter (talk) 18:04, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

    old-games.com

    I cannot seem to find anything related on the local blacklist and I'm hitting the blacklist trying to use it as a source. No obvious reason to blacklist jumps out. I'm assuming some regex is involved with the -games.com suffix. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 23:44, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

    Free Web Town

    freewebtown.com/ Just need it because I can only access it if I make a link to it in the sandbox (most sites are blocked on my computer). Why was it blocked? Pubserv (talk) 19:20, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

    Could you please tell us which domain/link, just leave off the 'http://' from the beginning and we will see what you are talking about. Thanks! --Dirk Beetstra 07:18, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

    freewebtown.com/ Pubserv (talk) 19:34, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

    Not blacklisted here on Misplaced Pages. It's blacklisted globally. See meta:Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/2008-12#www.freewebtown.com.
     Defer to Global blacklist if you want to contest this listing, but it's unlikely you will succeed because free web sites are highly unlikely ever to be appropriate for linking or referencing on Misplaced Pages. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:48, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
    Never mind. Defer means delay so that doesn't make sense. Why is it blacklisted globally? And how? Even at Google? Pubserv (talk) 19:15, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
    In this context it refers not to delay, but to submit to, IE Ill defer to your judgement in this case. meta:Meta-Wiki is the central project that oversees global issues (Stewards, global blocks, global rights, crosswiki blacklisting ect) freewebtown was an issue for multiple projects (which may or may not have included enwiki) and it was deemed that blacklisting there was needed. Since it wasnt blacklisted locally we cannot remove it from the blacklist. You would need to file a request there. In regards to the term global it refers to all meta:Wikimedia projects hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation. Werieth (talk) 19:23, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

    PowerSupplies.net

    Could you please remove this valuable resource site from the Misplaced Pages blacklist? The site started more than 10 years ago, it is a valuable source of information, for several years was #1 in Google search for “power supplies” words, never used link exchange to boost page ranking, does not send email to sell unsolicited products. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.166.255.115 (talk • contribs) 17:02, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

    Some information:
    Blaclisted in July 2012.
    Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject_Spam/2012 Archive Jul 2#Long term SMPS Power Supplies related Spamming indicates this was an attempt to maximize Google AdSense revenue.
    COIbot report says the link was added 8 times.
    That said, the intent didn't seem to be to advertise. The web site itself is simply a browsable database of power supplies, and published technical spec sheets. It seems to be more of a portal, with no ads, no "buy it here" links, or anything spammy.
    I see it more as a tool to find specifications for individual power supplies than a possible reference site for citing on Misplaced Pages. If any of those spec sheets need to be referenced, powersupplies.net links to the external sites that host those spec sheets, so they can be referenced instead.
    Question: What possible use would this site have on Misplaced Pages? ~Amatulić (talk) 23:37, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
    There is a description here (www.smps.com/) of what appears to be their three websites. I can see using them as a reference for a specific power supply company, although I was trying to see if we even have any articles about any power supply companies. Power supplies are like circuit boards. They are inside your computer and no one knows they are there or what they do, but without them you would not be able to use your computer. The other two websites are more interesting though (both also blacklisted). Apteva (talk) 07:14, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
    If you go back to the original report, many of the IPs were either from Texas ISPs or they were Dell IPs; Dell is based in Austin, Texas as is the owner of some of these domains. The IP above is a Dell Computer IP.
    no Declined. If an established, trusted editor wants to link to a particular page; they can request it at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist
    --A. B. 17:04, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

    prouty.org

    I am following up to VRTS ticket # 2013081210002123 sent by a representative of prouty.org, which was blacklisted in August 2011.

    The site wasn't blacklisted on the basis of any discussion on this page, but rather based on an ANI discussion (archived here). The blacklisting was apparently done in response to disruption caused by linking to an attack page at www.prouty.org/mcadams/

    I know that we don't de-list sites based on requests from people with a conflict of interest, and anyone who monitors this page will know I have declined such requests on many occasions.

    However, based on that ANI conversation, it seems that the blacklisting may have been done hastily. The final comment from bureaucrat Infrogmation (talk · contribs) suggests that this listing should be revisited.

    I suggest not de-listing, but modifying the entry to blacklist only that attack page. I would do it myself, but I prefer the transparency of discussion this public page first, rather than back-room OTRS communications. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:17, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

    It's been a month. Shall I assume non-response equals concurrence? ~Amatulić (talk) 23:03, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
    Concur -- Infrogmation (talk) 23:15, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
    Why not just exceptions for specific sources, such as those to be restored to Fletcher_Prouty? Links to diffs showing where else prouty.org links were appropriate would be informative. --Elvey (talk) 22:13, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

     Not done - I ended up whitelisting the 'about' page instead, which seemed to satisfy the prouty.org representative. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:42, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

    dyingscene.com

    Why is this site blacklisted? I don't see any reason in the log. I wanted to add some information to an article about Greg Hetson, but I couldn't add references, as dyingscene.com is blacklisted. Nazgul02 (talk)

    It appears this site was blacklisted back in 2010 for sourcing its own articles on Misplaced Pages. I have personally contacted the owner of the site and was assured they no longer contribute to wikipedia from their own site. Since it's been 3 years, my recommendation would be to unblock them in order to allow our contributors to reference them for articles related to punk music. - Dr.Music —Preceding undated comment added 18:39, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

    "They no longer contribute to Misplaced Pages from their own site." What does that have to do with anything? They're not blocked from editing (from their site or elsewhere). They're blacklisted. Two totally different things. They can edit, but they just can't add their site to Misplaced Pages. Naturally, if they're blacklisted, they have no motivation to contribute. That's hardly surprising.
     Defer to Whitelist to request white-listing of individual pages. ~Amatulić (talk) 06:09, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
    The request of a longtime contributor (Nazgul) is non-trivial, and three years is a long time to exclude a site for what may have been a one-time indiscretion. An assertion by the site's owner is also significant and it's worthwhile to assume good faith on the owner's part. I support removing this from the blacklist. -Pete (talk) 17:27, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
    It is indeed logged here. As the original blacklister, I don't support removing it from the list; COI editors were warned multiple times to stop, and it took a blacklist entry to stop them. I don't have a problem with selective whitelisting. OhNoitsJamie 15:44, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

    petition

    I understand the desire to avoid links to online petition-gathering sites, as a likely spam source. However, the blanket banning of any URL with the word "petition" in it (as best as I can understand the Regex, it ain't my thing) has been causing false spam flags in multiple articles that I deal with, because they link to legitimate news articles dealing with someone petitioning the court (example) or to copies of such court petitions (example). -Nat Gertler (talk) 02:56, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

    Support. Way too many FPs to be useful (regex in question is \bpetition(?:online|s)?\b. @NatGertler: You're correct in your understanding. Also, JzG (talk · contribs) added what evolved into this filter here, but I can't find a log entry for it. Jackmcbarn (talk) 03:09, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
    Support due to false-positives for URLs of news-stories about petitions. For example, this flagging is what first caught my attention. How about tightening the filter to match only the hostname (before first "/", or also other specific known sites by hostname) rather than "anywhere in URL". DMacks (talk) 07:56, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
    Support - Another false positive here. The global filter already has a less restructive entry that deals with petition sites (\bpetition(?:online|s24|site|spot|-?them)\.com\b) so I'm not sure the local one is even necessary. If it is, I agree with DMacks that something like \bpetition(?:online|s)?*\.(com|org|net)\b would prevent a lot of the false positives. TDL (talk) 22:31, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
    hmm, this rule needs to be adapted. Petition sites should all be blacklisted per WP:SOAPBOX (they are at best a primary source, but that petition will only be notable enough to be mentioned in any article when there are secondary sources, making the primary source superfluous), not any link that contains the word petition in it (note that there are many domains without the word petition that are plain petition sites ...). --Dirk Beetstra 15:24, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
    Actually .... Maybe it is e bot misinterpreting and tagging wrongly .. There is no catch on 'petition' itself ... http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/05/a-petition-for-free-online-access-of-taxpayer-funded-research/ ... <--- see! --Dirk Beetstra 18:31, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
    this link is reported as blacklisted on Access2Research, as mentioned on the meta blacklist talkpage. --Dirk Beetstra 18:34, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
    Support. Also in the meantime, I removed the banner from Access2Research and also (I hope correctly) added these URLs to the whitelist here: User:Cyberpower678/spam-exception.js -Pete (talk) 19:58, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
    Support I experienced problems as well. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:09, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
    note these links are not blacklisted! --Dirk Beetstra 21:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
    Dirk, can you help me understand what caused the bot to make this edit? I must confess that I am not terribly well versed in Misplaced Pages's various anti-spam tools. Whatever caught that bot's attention, I think, is the thing that should be changed. -Pete (talk) 22:02, 28 August 2013 (UTC)r to Dirk -- ?
    The bot gathers and compiles the regexes exactly as the blacklist extension for Misplaced Pages does. It then validates the links against the regex. If it finds a positive match, it validates the regex against the whitelist, if it doesn't find a positive match, it then checks the exceptions list. If it finds a positive match, it ignores it and if it doesn't, it stores the link in the blacklist database and proceeds to flag it.—cyberpower Online 22:33, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
    So it's working off the same Misplaced Pages-specific blacklist, and also the global blacklist? If that's the case, why does Dirk say these links are not blacklisted? Surely the bot caught them somehow -- I guess that's the part I'm not getting. I thought they were caught because of a regex line based on the word "petition" -- am I wrong? -Pete (talk) 22:39, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
    Yes. It is working off of both blacklists, regexes are compiled exactly as the wikipedia software compiles it and uses them in the scan. Dirk is pointing out that the blacklist doesn't seem to be blocking the addition of links with petition in it for some reason which would indicate a bug in the filter itself. I myself added links to pages, and the filter seems to only intermittently stop the edit. Pete, your understanding of what flagged this bot is correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyberpower678 (talk • contribs)
    I've figured out what the issue is. The MediaWiki spam-blacklist only matches within the domain name, while User:Cyberbot II matches anywhere in the url. I get the filter notice if I try to put in a url with petition before the .com. TDL (talk) 23:08, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
    It helps everyone, if you post in one spot and not post everywhere for me to have to follow you. You are tripping the global regex rule, not the local one.—cyberpower Online 00:22, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
    Thanks to a few editors, the problem has been traced to the bot using an old outdated regex generator from the blacklist extension.
    • I have updated the regex generator. It should now mirror Misplaced Pages's blacklist filter when scanning regexes. The change will go into effect on the next run.—cyberpower Online 14:26, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
    Do you have any way of going through all the articles that the bot flagged this run, rechecking them, and removing any false warnings that it generated? --Nat Gertler (talk) 15:09, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
    The bot untags any misplaced tags. The bot determines tags that are misplaced when the links on it don't register in the active buffer of the bot. The active buffer is a collection of links stored in array elements identified by their page. Inclusion to this buffer is when there is a positive match to the blacklist, and a negative match to the whitelist and exceptions list. Currently, the bot's buffer is still loaded with the old regex generator so it won't untag the false ones this round.—cyberpower Online 15:36, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
    Cyberpower, I think it would help a good deal if the tags the bot leaves explicitly invite editors to remove the tag (instead of or in addition to leaving a comment here) if they believe it has been left in error. Even as an experienced user, I was reluctant to do so at Access2Research because the tag explicitly directs editors to the blacklist/whitelist process. However, many editors are not technically inclined and have no idea what a blacklist is. Would you consider tweaking the text at the top of the tag to include this suggestion? -Pete (talk) 17:30, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

    prodirectsoccer.com

    This is a website that I have used extensively as a source for the Nike Total 90 and Nike Mercurial Vapor articles. I have no idea whether anyone has used this site to spam Misplaced Pages in the past, but as you can tell, my intentions with it are purely encyclopaedic. I would appreciate this site being unblocked, since it is one of the leading resources on soccer equipment. – PeeJay 09:25, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

    123greetings.com.net

    I'm not sure why it was blacklisted, possible spamming at one point in the past? It's wiki entry is valid so I'm wondering if it can be delisted from the spamlist as there are some pages I'd like to use? Josh769 (talk) 08:27, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

    dailyreckoning.com.au

    It took me forever to find the log in the mess of words and links on this page and the warning notice when I tried to use a link from here. When I finally did find the block log, it has no record of why it was blocked or by whom. It looks like the site is fine to me, so it should be unblocked.--Metallurgist (talk) 23:11, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

    Not sure what mess you are talking about, however.
    It has a clear record, very large case of COI spamming with many socks. See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2008_Archive_Oct_2#Agora_Publishing_spam_on_Wikipedia. The site may be fine, but a quick search showed me that there it looks that there is still an SEO busy spamming these sites (quite successfully .. I'll poke A. B. (talk · contribs) who did the original additions). I would not unblock this, but whitelist specific links on these servers that are of use, so  Defer to Whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra 04:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

    tellynagari.com

    I am astonished why this site is blocked as spam. This is first time I am trying to link an interesting relevant article reference on an existing page on wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.44.113.253 (talk • contribs) 06:14, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

    It was quite relentlessly spammed .. if you want to use one link as a reference, I would suggest to whitelist:  Defer to Whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra 06:07, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

    academicroom.com

    Greetings. I was tasked with editing an article that has been rejected twice. I need to use academicroom.com as a source but it is blacklisted. I went to the "Spam Blacklist" page (https://meta.wikimedia.org/Spam_blacklist) and it is not listed there. I can't speak for others, but my for own field, which is nanotechnology, Academic Room is a very credible resource, running out of Harvard University. I don't think it serves anyone well to put a blanked ban on it. I therefore request this site be removed from the blacklist. The resources that I need to use can be found in the following hierarchy of the blacklisted site: /physical-sciences/nanotechnology Nanotech-editor (talk) 21:26, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

     Defer to Whitelist Given the heavy spamming attempts, it's not appropriate to remove from blacklist, regardless of credentials. OhNoitsJamie 21:36, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
    Thanks for your response--I agree with you but the spamming was a year ago. With Harvard in the picture, several thousand academics have joined the portal, increasing the amount of content substantially. But at the same time your concern is understood. Is there some kind of a conditional removal of blacklist or some kind of monitoring that can be done? I think this would be a useful feature to have, if it does not already exist. I however strongly recommend removing the blacklist given the period since the spamming. Nanotech-editor (talk) 03:57, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

    NORM.org

    NORM supplies information that upsets some people. It is a site with foreskin restoration information and is anti-routine male infant circumcision. This means that people have split into entrenched warring camps. This site is likely to have offended someone rather than, itself, being spam. It does have items for sale, yes, but this is not its primary function. Please look at the original reaosn for listing with care and determine if the site is genuinely spammy, with a view to delisting it. Fiddle Faddle 16:59, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

    They don't sell anything, here is a citation from the website, "devices" section: "NORM does not endorse any device below and all information is provided as a service to help you find the device that works the best for you. Please compare prices, features and talk with other men who are restoring before making a purchase" -- This is a non-commercial, informative organzation (E-Kartoffel (talk) 17:23, 24 September 2013 (UTC))
    As an advocacy site, I don't see how it would typically meet WP:RS guidelines.  Defer to Whitelist for individual links. OhNoitsJamie 18:03, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
    Jamie, a site's reliability or even neutrality is utterly irrelevant in this context. This sort of inappropriate judgement will blur the lines of the blacklist, and create a general-purpose way to introduce a chilling effect on contentious subjects. The spam blacklist's criteria MUST be limited to spamming, and not related to RS. IMHO. Eaglizard (talk) 22:25, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
    While I have followed your suggestion, the site is not spam. Advocacy, yes. information, yes, spam no. Surely this is a spam blacklist? RS is a further step. Fiddle Faddle 21:39, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
    The misnomer of this page has been noted a long, long time ago, and requests to change that have been made as well - but note that it is not about whether a site is spam, it is about whether a site got spammed, which is a subtle difference. We have had spam from very notable, very important organisations, and if that gets to a level that it is uncontrollable, then the spam-blacklist is the way to stop the spamming (or bad abuse of a similar kind). When that happens, the bar for removal is not whether a site is spam, but whether it is of general use, which I do not believe, and whether it could be pushed/abused further, which I don't think is completely unlikely. --Dirk Beetstra 07:12, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
    Very few sites are of general use, and almost all, nay all, are capable of being introduced as inappropriate links. One needs to pay regard to context. Sites such as this one have genuine limited use here. This one probably only has a valid use in articles concerned with the human male penis, either as an anatomical organ in its own right or on pages detailing penis modification. It is, in lower case, a reliable source, though probably does not pass muster as a Reliable Source. Its deployment as a genuine Primary Source in most cases and as a Secondary Source in some cases is most assuredly useful, within the limitations of usage of an authoritative Primary Source. My suspicion is that, in the past, it was disliked by someone, and that it was then added, either by them, or by someone acting in the honest but mistaken belied that it was inappropriate. This is likely because the concept of routine male infant circumcision creates camps and warring factions. So please give this one still further consideration. Fiddle Faddle 12:03, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
    Hmm .. there is the problem .. you suspect 'that, in the past, it was disliked by someone, and that it was then added, either by them, ..' .. that assumes either incompetence or bad faith on the editor(s) that blacklisted the link. Note that e.g. examiner.com was plainly spammed, and is (though bit less than in the past) a spam-magnet, yet it contains good stuff; it was not blacklisted because it is not a WP:RS, as is sometimes assumed. Owners of respectable organisations (or e.g. their SEOs or webmasters) do sometimes get into the habit of spamming their good sites (people involved with examiner.com were involved in the spamming, case of WP:COI). My suspicion would be that that type of action was also the case here, or it was indeed plainly spammed. There are very, very few cases of WP:IDONTLIKEIT that result in blacklisting, it would be an abuse of process. For this type of site, just as for many porn sites, I see a lot of potential of abuse, and just limited appropriate use - sometimes the blacklist is just the best option to keep abuse at bay. But I'll try to have a look here. --Dirk Beetstra 12:31, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
    Sometimes things slip past. This site has, in the past, been part of campaigns of "I don't like it" in venues not limited to Misplaced Pages. A persuasive argument can be made to encourage others to act in good faith if the persuader is skilled. It does not show incompetence, just bad luck to have been the person seeing the issue or of having it described to them. You are about to give this all and only what I ask for: an impartial review. I understand the points you make about imperfect usage of links well. Interestingly, if I took the time, I can see sufficient WP:RS about NORM itself to create a valid article on them here. NORM-UK an allied but separate organisation has one, and, norm.org, naturally, is one of the links form that article. Fiddle Faddle 12:51, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
    I know things can slip past .. but that does not happen too often (and I have been here long).
    Anyway, found the addition by MuZemike (talk · contribs). Looking a bit further, the site was indeed 'spammed' - editors running around adding (and re-adding) the links to pages where these links do not belong (like Talk:Barack Obama and National Liberation Army (Libya)) with as reason: "The National Organization of Restoring Men has information about Circumcision and Foreskin Restoration. Sign the White House circumcision petition needs signers up to and on OCT 23" and "The Occupy Misplaced Pages Movement will not stop. The Occupy Misplaced Pages movement is prepared for censorship by the man. Read this message".. just the type of promotional edits the spam blacklist is supposed to stop. Maybe it is indeed not liked enough .. at least that was found by some editors who found it necessary to promote it further ...  ;-) --Dirk Beetstra 13:05, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
    Good lord. What total stupidity from those who added it! Was this one imbecilic editor or a team of them? If one editor, then I suspect it has been nipped in the bud. If team handed I suppose that is a different matter. I'd still like to see it off the blacklist, but I can see persuasive arguments for retention here in the latter case. Fiddle Faddle 15:09, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
    There were at least two, and the threat that they would not stop suggests that blocking one would quickly result in yet another IP. I would not have had hope, seeing the statements, that blocking would help (I also saw edit warring by one IP). Please, just whitelist the links rhat are really needed. --Dirk Beetstra 06:00, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
    I suppose so :) I hate idiots like those, who spoil things for the rest of us. It is quite the reverse of what we are about. Fiddle Faddle 06:38, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
    It does not even have to be the people themselves, it could be SEO (though this looks not like that) or an employee who is over eager. Unfortunately, we see this every now and then with respectable organisations, although the nofollow makes the sites not increase on the google ranking, there will still be people following your links, arriving on your site where you can 'sell' your 'product'. It pays to have the links and that remains the problem. Can I safely  Clerk declined this and  Defer to Whitelist? --Dirk Beetstra 07:13, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
    With regret, yes, I am afraid you can and should. Fiddle Faddle 22:32, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
    ← I'm new here, but from all I understand I'd just remove the blacklist entry. This may have warranted blacklisting at the time (multiple IPs (at least 1, 2, 3, 4), range of articles, seemingly distinctive domain), but the event was two years ago (advertised a US petition on 23 October 2011) and the blacklist entry did not stop the disruption, they merely changed the URLs until I assume they either ran out of proxy IPs or saw that they were reverted too quickly to be effective.
    While I don't see that this is a useful source (despite it being used), it doesn't appear to fit the criteria from WP:BLACK/WP:BLACKLIST any longer.
    Amalthea 13:29, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
    Adding additional support for  Clerk declined this and  Defer to Whitelist. OhNoitsJamie 15:13, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
    Yes, I saw your comment above, and there's already an entry at the whitelist -- it was when I was considering that request actually that made me come here. I'm trying to understand the reasoning to not de-blacklist since I can't align the responses above with the written guideline as I understand it. I was under the assumption that blacklist entries are handled similarly to blocks: once one is no longer needed to prevent damage, it is to be removed. Is that wrong? Is it common and accepted practice that a domain that is no reliable secondary source will remain on the blacklist once it has been added (no matter if it was added appropriately or not)? Amalthea 15:53, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
    No, blacklistings are not handles the same way blocks are. If a blacklisted site is not an appropriate WP:RS for Misplaced Pages, there is no compelling reason to remove it from the blacklist. OhNoitsJamie 16:34, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

    historyandpolicy.org

    I believe www.historyandpolicy.org should be univerally whitelisted. It is an academic research site on UK business, history, and government policy. See, for example, the citation flagged by the spambot on w:Supermarket. I assume there are papers that discuss individual businesses, and this is what fooled the bot. Choor monster (talk) 17:44, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

    I agree. A link to this site was tagged today. The link (which astonishingly, I can't even reproduce here as part of this discussion!) appears to be to a legitimate paper, written by a lecturer in twentieth-century British history at the University of York, who is also the author of a book on Black Market Morality, and whose doctoral thesis won the University of Cambridge's Ellen McArthur Prize in Economic History for 2003. We may argue whether his work is reliable, or biassed, or if it is academically sound, but calling it spam seems to be very strange. --Nigelj (talk) 22:51, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
    This request makes it clear why the domain was originally blacklisted.
    I don't know whether or not this is still valid; but in any case the reference to a paper hosted there is valuable for Dunton Plotlands, so either de-blacklisting or adding exceptions would seem sensible. --David Edgar (talk) 00:50, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
    I've just been directed here from University where a link added in 2010, long before the cause of the original action, has just been picked up for blacklisting. The link in question discusses the history of UK universities, and is apparently written by a respectable historian Robert G. W. Anderson MA DPhil FRSE FRSA . So while I'm new to this game the proposal from David Edgar makes sense to me. Regards, Jonathan A Jones (talk) 06:32, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

    I am tempted here to suggest to request whitelisting. It was clearly spammed (and they noted the effects of their spamming - their ranking went up massively, their SEO worked).  Defer to Whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra 08:08, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

    But is it really spam when a reputable academic edits to link to something relevant even if they originally wrote it themselves? Suggest the signal to noise ratio with this is quite high, as opposed to proper spammers who're trying to sell something and insert crap links who generate a lot of noise but no signal. Barney the barney barney (talk) 16:04, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

    beacon.org

    beacon.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

    Beacon Press is a Boston-based independent publisher. I don't know a lot about them, but I understand them to be a legit outfit. A blacklisted-links template popped up in Nancy Gertner today; the article cites the Beacon Press website for Gertner's book in the EL section, which I think is fair. Reviewing it appears it was blacklisted in July of 2012 because of 3 abusers with "systematic efforts to promote this publisher and their books." I'm inclined to think that blocking the entire publisher's site isn't the proper scale, and this should be unblocked. But maybe I'm missing the magnitude of the problem, and only the individual books that are not a problem should be whitelisted? Thanks. jhawkinson (talk) 06:56, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

    I see mainly two types of links, one for products, and one for authors. The former is linking to their specific page for selling the book - we have ISBN to replace that, we do not need to link to where a book is sold (we might want to link to a preview for references, although also that is under discussion, and I don't know if they provide previews - none of the links seem preview links), and for authors, there are independent websites that link to all books written by a certain author, I don't think that listings on the publisher page are useful .. nor neutral. Especially, seen that there were editors pushing this link (promoting their site, likely to sell more books) suggests me that these should be removed, they are not really needed and there are more neutral alternatives, or, where there is unique information, that some specific links should be whitelisted. so,  Defer to Whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra 08:33, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

    Infibeam.com

    Due to unknown reasons this link is blocked and shows in the Spam Blacklist. Infibeam.com is an authorized Indian e-commerce company. We provide our customers with best deals and make their hectic life easy with the online shopping facility from their homes or offices. Any customer that visits Misplaced Pages will be able to go to our home site link directly and would not have to face the any problem for searching the link through Misplaced Pages. We assure that we will abide by the content policies of your sites in the future to avoid any such issues. :) ·Rachnarawat· ✉ 05:23, 24 September 2013‎ GMT + 5:30

    Well, the reason it is here is because editors, likely with a conflict of interest (read: people who were interested in being able to link to the site, just as you here remark) were blatantly spamming the site on wikipedia (handful of IPs, some named accounts which strongly suggested a vested interest, creation of spammy Misplaced Pages pages regarding this organisation). If Misplaced Pages editors think that they add to a certain page, then that specific link can be whitelisted, but I don't think that we should remove it here now.  Defer to Whitelist for specific links either directly linked to the topic, or to be used as a reference. --Dirk Beetstra 12:51, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

    historyandpolicy.org

    Appears to be a legitimiate website with links to KCL. Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:22, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

    We are not questioning the legitimacy of a site, but whether it was spammed. I above suggested to whitelist specific links ( Defer to Whitelist). --Dirk Beetstra 08:54, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

    reverbnation.com

    I believe that ReverbNation (Alexa ranked 1526 Globally) should be removed from the blacklist.

    1. ReverbNation has an article and is a well financed and accepted operation that provides local and national rankings for musical artists.
    2. Toolserver shows 193 incoming links to ReverbNation http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/backlinkscount.py?title=ReverbNation
    3. ReverbNation has a template for use in external links sections Template:Reverbnation
    4. I believe that whitelisting individual pages will be too much work for well over 100 pages that were affected by a bot last night.
    5. The site is professionally run, I don't know how to check to see if the spam still persists or if the site had a virus that has been repaired, I'm confident that this is not a website that is interested in spamming anyone.009o9 (talk) 08:43, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
    6. Appspot indicates 2179 links to reverbnation.com in the English Misplaced Pages http://wikipediatools.appspot.com/linksearch.jsp?set=major&link=reverbnation.com&https=1 009o9 (talk) 08:56, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

    Also, the editor who blacklisted the site did not log any reason for the entry and has since stated s/he would not oppose de-blacklisting. Jaguar766 (talk) 22:42, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

    I've actually checkY Done this earlier today after researching the situation (for reference, was blacklisted following a sockpuppet investigation where someone apparently tried to advertise his blog and songs via many external links).
    I must however point out that I do not agree with any of the reasons given above. I removed the blacklist entry because I believe it is no longer necessary, as per WP:BLACKLIST. After looking into the site, I generally consider any Reverbnation pages unsuitable for use in a Misplaced Pages article, both as an external link (there is almost always a better official representation of the topic to list, per WP:ELMINOFFICIAL a Reverbnation/MySpace/Twitter/... profile should then not be listed) and as a reference (possibly as a primary source, if you can show that the topic even has control over their Reverbnation representation). In fact I'm currently going through all instances where they are used, and thus far have removed/replaced every one.
    Amalthea 20:46, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

    voobly.com

    I think this site does not deserve to be blacklisted. On the site you can find replacement service for the old MSN Gaming Zone. This should be noted in the MSN Gaming Zone article, but it can't due to the blacklist.

    1. The site is run by a community that only cares about playing their games. There is no reason for them to spam anywhere.
    2. It is important that the page can be linked to from old MSN Gaming Zone articles, because it provides (even improved) replacement for the CD-ROM games that the MSN Gaming Zone used to support, before it went offline.

    — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.192.102.20 (talk • contribs) 09:11, 28 September 2013‎ (UTC)


    cbronline.com

    Contains the archives of the Computer Business Review, an indispensable source of information about business computing of the 1980s and 90s. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 15:50, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

    countrycode.org

    This was the incident that triggered the addition of this domain to the spam blacklist. The incident lists a number of examples of link spam - but most are examples for a similar domain, "areacode.org". I can't find any examples of spam for countrycode.org. The two domains are registered to different people, but the websites look very similar, and both link to the same parent organisation "numberingplans.com".

    There are 18 pages that reference this website, and it looks like the references were all added before the blacklist (i.e. before June 2010). These pages have all recently been tagged with the "Blacklisted-links" template (which lead me here). Can this domain be unlisted, or should I remove the links from the pages instead? Thanks in advance! Dracunculus (talk) 19:17, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

     Not done and are ad-free alternatives (and more authoritative). OhNoitsJamie 14:57, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

    StatSheet.com

    This is a repeated request from past years. The statsheet sites are valid sources for college basketball tenures and statistics. A couple of years ago, there were incidents of someone affiliated with the site spamming content on WP (See original blacklist discussion) so there probably was at that time good reason to blacklist. I would like to strongly encourage admins to "un-blacklist" the site. Many sports editors (including me) use this site because it is perhaps the best and most accessible site for college basketball statistics and other data (such as national rankings, etc) back to 1996. I understand the reasons for the original blacklist, but would ask that this be re-considered given that the activity seems to be contained to one user (who is probably long gone) and the site is otherwise useful. Thanks. Rikster2 (talk) 12:45, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

    I concur that I think this website should be un-blacklisted. I understand why it was originally; that one overzealous promoter "ruined it for the rest of us," but the fact is these websites are great resources. I've used information I've found in them without citing them because of this blacklist. Jrcla2 (talk) 20:31, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
    I also meant to add that I don't think the blocked user will be back; this issue was from years ago and I doubt he still cares anymore. Jrcla2 (talk) 12:46, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

    abseits-soccer.com

    abseits-soccer is a website that contains info on German football and is widely used by WP:FOOTY. The trigger is apparently \bsoccer\.com\b. Cannot see a reason why abseits-soccer would be blocked for spam, so I believe this is a case of a false positive. Additionally, this entry is from April 2012, but has no reasoning given in the log. --Madcynic (talk) 14:21, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

    That entry should be changed to (?<=//|\.)soccer\.com\b to fix the same problem as happened at #Hyphenated domain being misinterpreted?. Jackmcbarn (talk) 14:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
    Could someone do that, then? I don't trust myself with this... Madcynic (talk) 16:41, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
    Amalthea removed the entry completely, so this should be fixed now. Jackmcbarn (talk) 17:53, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
    Ah yes, checkY done -- didn't realize there was another false positive, I removed it after seeing a report of a false positive with canadian-soccer.com. Amalthea 18:11, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

    energy-business-review.com

    Why is this website blocked? It is used in articles like Project Hayes and Waitahora Wind Farm, and does not look like a spam website to me. --Pakaraki (talk) 17:34, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

    Looks like it was being spammed by this user and perhaps others. OhNoitsJamie 18:14, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

    Completed Proposed removals

    Pv-magazine

    'They have stopped ..', I am afraid that is because it is blacklisted. I would suggest to  Defer to Whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra 13:32, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
    There was a request in this section (by the same person) that sat here quite a while, unanswered, and it fell off this page during the June archiving. See MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/June 2013#pv-magazine.com.
    We make a point to say we consider de-listing requests from trusted, high-volume editors. Apteva isn't exactly "high volume" but certainly trusted (especially since Apteva is a legitimate alternative account), and I see no evidence of a COI as with a previous de-listing request from 2011. Apteva has posted a request twice now. It deserves some consideration and discussion.
    It seems that Pv-magazine is the authoritative reliable source for photovoltaic topics, and it is often difficult (I have tried) to find alternatives. Deferring to the whitelist may create an undue burden there if it needs to be sourced frequently. I suggest perhaps 'promoting' the domain from the blacklist to XLinkBot and monitoring it for a while. ~Amatulić (talk) 02:33, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
    I should have been more specific. They promised to stop. It was also requested removed by a second editor earlier, here. Apteva (talk) 07:17, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
    It seems pointless to put this domain on both the white and black lists, with the same affect that it is on neither. Apteva (talk) 01:47, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
    It's not the same as being on neither. The blacklist restricts the whole domain, the whitelist is where you would go to request use of a specific page that is hosted on the domain. This allows you to use it as a source without allowing the publishers to have their marketing interns link every article they write on every page they can think of. - MrOllie (talk) 02:39, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
    I have no interest in having to ask permission for each link. I think it is reasonable to believe that the publisher understands that they can not spam WP. Apteva (talk) 14:51, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
    Redemption is always possible. Do any other admins here object to my suggestion to move this site to XLinkBot and see what happens? ~Amatulić (talk) 23:51, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

    PresentViewer.com

    This site was added to the blacklist for some reason. I can't see why. The site provides information of products so I reckon it could used as a valuable resource. Thanks LumCel1 (talk) 17:10, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

    Seems dead to me. My browser reports "no data received." ~Amatulić (talk) 23:40, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
    See w:Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Lauriejackpot1. Short answer: no Declined. Ask for whitelisting of specific links, but this is better blacklisted. I would not even consider delisting if Jimbo himself would request de-listing. So many socks and so many spammed domains .. this is better blacklisted for some time so it does not get spammed again. --Dirk Beetstra 15:11, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

    Koolmuzone

    This site was blacklisted after spamming by multiple IP editors. I have found that it is a notable Music blog and I have started an article about it (Koolmuzone). But I was prompted by the spam filter when I entered this link in the infobox. Besides I find that the most of the ips who did spamming were on a single ip range and range block could have helped here. Also this spamming seems to have stopped now. So I request it to be removed from the blacklist. Thanks --SMS 17:22, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

    "This spamming seems to have stopped" because the site is blacklisted, obviously. It was blacklisted just a couple months ago. It is highly likely that the spamming will resume if it is de-listed.
    I don't see a reason to de-list the whole site, since it's highly unlikely that a blog would ever be used as a reliable source for articles unrelated to the blog. Instead, you may request white-listing of a specific page (such as www.koolmuzone.pk/about/).  Defer to Whitelist. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:31, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
    My bad, I thought Xlinkbot keep eye on these blacklisted link addition and every addition is logged here. Probably you can also pour some light on this site's reliability as a source. I find that many news agencies of Pakistan (Daily Times, The Express Tribune, The News International) cite this blog for news related to entertainment industry of the country. So can we also cite it here? --SMS 17:02, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
    No, that log just records the successful additions. Once it's blacklisted, there's nothing to log. I could be mistaken, but I think the blacklist hits don't get logged at all. I'd be surprised if they weren't but I haven't seen such a log.
    As to your question about reliability, well, generally we don't cite blogs; see WP:ELNO. There are exceptions, such as if the blog author is writing on a topic for which he's a notable expert, or it's a news blog authored by a bona-fide journalist. Blogs are often WP:TERTIARY sources, meaning the information you find in them can usually be found elsewhere in a secondary source. If you just need one or two pages, the whitelist is the place to request that. ~Amatulić (talk) 04:24, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
    Thanks that helps. I will proceed with the request at Whitelist. --SMS 08:14, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
    @Amatulic:: I'm confused. As far as I can tell koolmuzone.com was added in 2009, not a few months ago, and koolmuzone.pk has never been blacklisted at all? There are quite a few links to it. .com is at the moment redirecting to .pk, the oldest .pk addition I can find is from February 2012. If we assume the page moved domains at that time then it appears it wasn't a significant spam problem those last 20 months. Amalthea 15:36, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

    www.otrcat.com

    MicrostockGroup

    I am trying to add some additional references to the Yuri Arcurs page and this domain seems to be blacklisted. Yuri has been posting in various threads on this site and it would be useful to use some of his posts as the source of the information. Specifically I was trying to use this link microstockgroup.com/14213/14213/msg218934/#msg218934 where me mentions a decline in earnings.

    Generally, forum sites are not to be used as sources per WP:ELNO although in this case your purpose would be for quoting the subject of the article. I don't see a reason to completely remove it from the blacklist, but if you want to link a single page,  Defer to Whitelist to request white-listing of that page. ~Amatulić (talk) 04:13, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
    OK, will do — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.29.200.210 (talk) 04:31, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

    Troubleshooting and problems

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

    CSS overflow

    style="overflow:auto... is recognized as a SPAM site/link; style="width:...;overflow:auto... isn't. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:19, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

    False positive?

    I'm trying to troubleshoot an issue reported via OTRS where a person tried to add a link to one of the Requested Articles sections (their personal website). The domain has a pattern like so: www.<name>-actor.com. I tried several combinations (e.g., myteethhurt-actor.com and foobar-actor.com and it seems the issue is the -actor bit. The domain in question is not on either the local or global blacklists, and I can't find a pattern in either that would match "-actor" exactly. Should I request an exception or just ask the person to omit the link or is this something that we should fix? §FreeRangeFrog 21:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

    Sorry for not getting back to you faster, the item in question is \bactor(?:suriya|arya)?\.com\b from meta added on 23:39, 28 November 2009 the user was optimizing several regex and goofed. The correct regex should be \bactor(suriya|arya)\.com\b Werieth (talk) 22:52, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
    No problem - sorry I also missed your reply. Glad you found it! §FreeRangeFrog 18:55, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

    Malformed entries

    This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

    I believe a few of these entries are missing the "b" part of the leading "\b":

    • \freegovernmentcellphones4u\.com\b
    • \securityguardtraining-hq\.com\b
    • \thekoreanroyal\.(?:com|org)\b

    – RobinHood70 06:07, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

    You're correct. As of right now, they don't work at all. Jackmcbarn (talk) 21:39, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
    information Note: I would do this (the actual edit itself seems simple) but I can't work out how to log it - failure to do this seems to attract penalties. Just as a matter of interest: I assume that as regular expressions, \f \s and \t are taken to be some character other than f s and t. I think that \t represents the tab character, &#x09; - what might the other two be? --Redrose64 (talk) 21:15, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
    \s matches a whitespace character, and \f matches a form-feed character. — Mr. Stradivarius 22:12, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

     Done, hopefully I haven't messed anything up — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:59, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

    "\bstay*\.co\.uk\b" false positive

    The entry for "\bstay*\.co\.uk\b" was added on 12 April 2011 in response to this request. However, this rule is overly broad (it seems to catch any domain starting "stay" and ending ".co.uk"). This is causing problems with the link to www.staysure.co.uk on Sunday Times Fast Track 100. Could this rule be removed or rewritten to be more specific to the domains mentioned in the original request? Thank you. – PartTimeGnome (talk | contribs) 17:16, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

    @Amatulic: @Hu12: ping. Jackmcbarn (talk) 17:54, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
    Looking at that site, it doesn't look like something Misplaced Pages should link to, because the site's only purpose appears to be promotional. I'd say  Defer to Whitelist to request white-listing of any specific page, although in browsing the site, I can't see any that could legitimately be used as a reference or even an external link. The tables shown in Sunday Times Fast Track 100 are linkfarms violating WP:NOTDIR, the external link columns really need to go. ~Amatulić (talk) 03:57, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
    Fair point. I've removed the external links. – PartTimeGnome (talk | contribs) 22:12, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

    Hyphenated domain being misinterpreted?

    At Meta, another user reported concern about blacklisting of jesus-passion.com. Existing links to this domain cannot be edited. The user was told that this domain is not blacklisted at meta, so it must be a local listing here. I don't see jesus-passion on the EN blacklist, but passion.com is there. Has the blacklisting of passion.com been extended to include the hyphenated form? If so, how can this be fixed? --Orlady (talk) 17:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

    The pattern \bpassion\.com\b will match the link in question, since \b is a word boundary. Werieth (talk) 18:23, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
    Changing it to \b(?<!jesus-)passion\.com\b will fix this. Jackmcbarn (talk) 18:42, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
    That change would fix things for that one domain, but it won't fix it for any other domain that innocently uses the form "-passion.com". I haven't investigated the existence of such domains, but it's easy to imagine names like chocolate-passion.com, football-passion.com, democracy-passion.com, and garden-passion.com. Is there a way to edit the pattern so that it would apply only to passion.com, and not hyphenated forms? --Orlady (talk) 18:56, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
    Yes, changing it to (?<=//|\.)passion.com\b should do that. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:03, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

    The problem is, that we have to take into account the possibility tha the rule maybe wanted to catch all possible instances of '<blah>-passion.com'. There are those typical domain ending (recently it was 'blahblahfacts.com', a large set of links all ending in 'facts.com'). I'd go for the whitelist here, for jesus-passion.ciom, keeps the already difficult regexes just a bit easier to read for those whose links are blocked.

    I will have a look at what the passion rule was supposed to catch. --Dirk Beetstra 03:47, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

    The spammed link was indeed passion.com itself (see COIBot reports linked from the tracking, and follow 'tracked' in there to see the spamming cases). I have adapted the rule according to the suggestion by Jackmcbarn, http://www.jesus-passion.com should now be linkable. --Dirk Beetstra 07:25, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

    Logging / COIBot Instr

    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.
    Note: If you do not log your entries, it may be removed if someone appeals the entry 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 who adds 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. This data is available in real-time on IRC.

    Poking COIBot

    When adding {{LinkSummary}}, {{UserSummary}} and/or {{IPSummary}} templates to WT:WPSPAM, WT:SBL, WT:SWL and User:COIBot/Poke (the latter for privileged editors) COIBot will generate linkreports for the domains, and userreports for users and IPs.


    Discussion

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

    Erwin's tool on meta

    On meta, we use the gadget User:Erwin/SBHandler (m:MediaWiki:Gadget-SBHandler.js) to add items to the blacklist on meta. It works from the Spam-blacklist talkpage (m:Talk:Spam blacklist), and from the cross-wiki reports generated by COIBot ('m:User:COIBot/XWiki/example.org'). I think that this tool could also be handy here on en.wikipedia, knowing that we have here also the talkpage of the blacklist ('here'), and the local reports ('Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Spam/Local/example.org') where this could be enabled.

    Would there be interest to have this tool here, and people who are capable/interested to move the gadget here (I tried to hack and activate it through my local .js, but I could not get it to work)?

    (Not willingly wanting to complicate things .. but one could consider to expand the tool to also work on XLinkBot's revertlist - being capable to blacklist from there, or to revertlist from here). --Dirk Beetstra 12:32, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

    Proposed addition backlog

    Returning to check something that I'd reported at the start of July (because the spammer is still going), it looks like none of the proposed additions have been processed this month - the only additions to the blacklist have been from admins adding URLs directly. Is there a reason why these aren't being processed? --McGeddon (talk) 09:48, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

    The problem is generally a significant lack of manpower. There are only a very few admins active here, all the others (including editors 'selecting' new admins) find XfD's more important. See also Category:Open Local COIBot Reports (and that are just bot flagged cases of what may be suspicious behaviour - the professional spam generally is less easy to detect - note that the bot closes/marks stale requests after some time of 'inactivity' of the link or when it got cleared up). --Dirk Beetstra 10:02, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
    Categories:
    MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist Add topic