MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/April 2010

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Proposed additions

Free movies

Could be potentially abused. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 10:21, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Potentially is (almost always) not enough, was it abused, or are there problems with the site?? --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:18, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It was used once in the site. Wikipedia does not support illigal pirating. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 10:21, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is spammed as well (see the COIBot reports linked). I have added it to XLinkBot, but am tempted to blacklist it, indeed. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:35, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Then why don't you? --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 15:59, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Forgot that it was here. Here we go! plus Added. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

onemoveformula.com

links
accounts

Note: An example link is "onemoveformula.com/Dogtraining.aspx", which is an article containing large amounts of text copied from Wikipedia with no credit given to Wikipedia (see dog article). An obvious sign of the copying is the text from image descriptions being copied into the paragraphs, without the associated image.

Repeated addition of spam link despite removal and warning from multiple editors. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:38, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done by A. B. (talk · contribs) via this edit. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:52, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

fnscarrifle.com

Domains
Users
  • Abuse report: [1]

Site is of no encyclopaedic merit and all insertions appear to be spam. A rangeblock was needed to stop the spamming, hence I am now blacklisting it. Guy (Help!) 09:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

vandemataram.com

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

See WikiProject Spam report MER-C 08:58, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added by A.B. MER-C 02:20, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

realestatemenu.info

links
accounts
prior discussions

Repeated addition of link into multiple articles by multiple SPA accounts, despite multiple warnings. On-going for 3-4 months. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:04, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


easyvideoproducer.com

4 warnings, only stopped when blocked

Spam domain
Related domain
Account

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:04, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:55, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

kosovoliberationarmy.com

Inappropriate self-published advocacy site repeatedly used for articles on Balkan ethnic conflicts. Spellcast (talk) 20:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added by Spellcast --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:34, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yangshuo Hidden Dragon Villa spam on Wikipedia

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:28, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:32, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with Yangshuo Hidden Dragon Villa

There's a problem with one entry: a typo for #Yangshuo Hidden Dragon Villa spam on Wikipedia. It should be spelt Yang not Young in the blacklist, i.e. 

\byoungshuocountrysidehotel\.com\b

should I think be replaced with 

\byangshuocountrysidehotel\.com\b

Spotted in this diff as another IP tried adding it.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 08:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Both domains have been used, the 'ou' one by user:219.159.102.17; the latter by user:222.84.204.36, user:110.72.210.178,user:John_travel2010, user:222.84.204.113, user:125.73.87.48, user:113.16.171.22, user:125.73.84.103, user:110.72.162.62 (and one named account who I deleted from this list). Maybe they changed the url, have both, or they are separate cases. Lets see the COIBot reports (will be here soon), and then decide. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:17, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

f1tutorials.com

Google Adsense ID: 5586436142094893

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:42, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:45, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


facts-about-herbal-tea.com

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 23:41, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 23:45, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Toshali Resorts spam on Wikipedia

See WikiProject Spam report MER-C 09:38, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

travelinfo.my

See WikiProject Spam report MER-C 14:32, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:00, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Expert Network Group, LLC spam on Wikipedia

Domain spammed:

Accounts:

References:

Problem includes uncontrollable spam as well as personal attacks on editors asking the spammer(s) to stop. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:46, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See also:
It's a mirror of the same site. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 01:53, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Pulse Trading:
780 Third Avenue,
8th Floor
New York, NY 10017
212.921.8181
Expert Network Group, LLC
780 Third Avenue, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10017
212.921.8181 TRADING
"ENG's partner, Pulse Trading, whom ENG is registered with, provides pure agency trading and clearing ..."
Given that they share an address and phone number, we should go ahead and block Pulse Trading links, too:
--A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:58, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
plus Added: pulsetrading.com, expertnetworkgroup.com
--A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

folk-craft.com

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

See WikiProject Spam report MER-C 05:55, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted globally. MER-C 07:45, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed removals

Control4

specifically: Control4.com, for use in article Control4

Link is to a company that produces well-known home automation hardware. May have been blacklisted due to a new user long ago unfamiliar with

WP:CORP, who was persistently posting the same spammy incoherent article each time it got speedy deleted. The manufacturer itself has no notability concerns or spammy problems that would merit blacklisting. Reswobslc (talk) 08:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Is Control4 notable? If so, we want an article on it. I don't have time to research notability in depth, but a quick Google News search shows 76 hits in the last 30 days and a Google News Archive search indicates hundred in the last several years. Reswobslc is a trusted, established editor so I say, let's let him go to work on a neutral article. In that case, he'll want a link to the company's site. To minimize spamming by the company, I recommend leaving control4.com domain on the blacklist and adding one specific page such as www. control4.com/company/history/ to the
Spam Whitelist --A. B. (talk • contribs) 15:08, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
I doubt the company spams - any more than you'd expect spam out of
User:Reswobslc/Control4. My recommendation would be to just remove Control4 from the blacklist entirely and only reinsert it absent any evidence of any actual malice on these guys' part. If anyone can point me to even one instance of spamming by these guys, well I'd sure be amused to see it, and I would rescind any argument I've made to the contrary. Reswobslc (talk) 20:12, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
Yikes, Reswobslc, don't shoot.
  • I've probably blacklisted more domains than just about any other admin, but I like to think I'm careful. I don't see myself as having an itchy spam trigger.
  • I can't afford a home theater, so I was unaware of Control4's name. Besides, nothing settles a notability dispute like several news articles -- and Google News is the best way to find them.
  • Believe it or not, I've seen uncontrollable spam out of larger companies before. If it happens over and over again, we have to blacklist it and then whitelist exceptions as needed.
  • I don't care what's on your user page, so don't worry about userboxes. As I already noted above, you're obviously a trusted, established editor.
--A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:01, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a link summary for control4.com.
Let's let COIbot research the link's past usage (it may take a few minutes or hours to return results):
--A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:08, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks, I appreciate the support, my comments weren't directed at your actions, which were clearly more thorough than those handling this in the past. I don't think I intend to "shoot" anyone, but I don't feel out of place treading lightly: I made what I thought was an improvement to an article, only to find it disappear outright - summarily speedy deleted as "unambiguous advertising or promotion" by one administrator, and cited as "processed meat" by another (above). This is the first time anyone has called my work spam, let alone two administrators on the same day, and yet I wrote it no differently than the two dozen (? I haven't counted) articles I've started/written over the years about unrelated topics (example example example example). The only difference is Control4 is on some archived abuse list somewhere and nobody can really explain why.
I don't really blame anyone - their actions obviously weren't malicious and I understand the reality is that there isn't time to investigate every apparent spam and that without quick decisive action, spammers win. I am also unfamiliar with the spam log, the COI bot, and the tools used to sniff out spammers, and am unable to interpret (let alone refute) that log entry from the past. I suppose all I'm saying is that if Control4 is cursed and administrators are predisposed to hitting the "spam" button based on that log entry in the future, I've got better things to do than to persistently canvass for its inclusion. All I can offer is my prose (in user space where it won't get deleted), my personal testimony that their equipment does what they say it does, my assertion there is no COI, and let the community (including yourself) do its thing for better or for worse. Thanks Reswobslc (talk) 21:40, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Best I can tell by the results of the COI bot (if I have understood its results correctly), the "spammer" culprit would be a Czech home theater company that sells a dozen different brands of gear and ostensibly has nothing to do with the companies who make the gear save for being a dealer of their products... see this page: http://www.insighthome.eu/partneri.html (a website COI bot returned) ... am I on the right track? certainly this wouldn't be the mischief of Control4 any more than it would be that of Siemens or Bose... Reswobslc (talk) 04:47, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The link is blacklisted here, not on Meta, so it was blacklisted due to a local (en,wikipedia) problem. Most of the time, that means persistent link-spamming, but we occasionally blacklist a domain due to persistent article-spamming which appears to have been the case here. I will remove the domain from the blacklist. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 11:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
minus Removed: http://control4.com.
Thank you for your persistence and for your content production; clearly Control4 merits an article. Please keep your new article on your watchlist to ensure it's not hijacked and turned into a PR piece. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 11:35, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Regex seems fine, A. B. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:40, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I appreciate it. Reswobslc (talk) 15:07, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

indiaeducation.net

A genuine website on education in India for the benefit of the educational community. It contains excellent information on various aspects of education in India and should be removed from the blacklist immediately. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.208.63 (talk) 06:50, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Typically, we do not remove domains from the spam blacklist in response to anonymous requests. Instead, we de-blacklist sites when trusted, high-volume editors request the use of blacklisted links because of their encyclopaedic value in support of our encyclopaedia pages. If such an editor asks to use your links, I'm sure the request will be carefully considered and your links may well be removed.
Relevant history:
Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
no Declined --A. B. (talk • contribs) 15:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

clickok.co.uk

Why is this site blocked at all? I have found it to be genuinely useful over the years and have tried adding it to the hero's journey / monomyth page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.171.60 (talk) 07:42, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This site is listed on the global blacklist, so we cannot do anything about it here. Please take your concerns to m:Talk:Spam blacklist. MER-C 02:26, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

digitpress.com

Contains many interesting historical documents about video games and home computing in the 1980s, including a number of formerly internal-only memos that are invaluable for documenting projects that never saw the light of day. I can't find the original blocking. Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:48, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. The site has tons of great, rare content on the history of video games. It makes no sense at all to have it blocked. --Stormwatch (talk) 10:17, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Original reason for blacklisting is here. There was heavy spamming of this site by multiple accounts over a lengthy period. I would tend to oppose removing the blacklisting. — Gavia immer (talk) 10:49, 31 March 2010 (UTC) Er, unless it gets removed from the blacklist while I'm typing this, of course :p — Gavia immer (talk) 10:50, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Spamming is generally a user problem, as is the case here. If the user in question is still a problem, let's deal with that problem and not punish everyone else for their behaviour. Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:44, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, Maury Markowitz. Certain problems extend so far and the spamming is so severe that blacklisting is the final and only solution. As someone else put it here, some time ago, sometimes a mosquito net is a better solution than swatting all the flies. It is not punishing, but it is an annoyance that good faith users all have to go through whitelisting. Remember that spamming is about making money, it is not simple vandalism. People really do an effort to spam (sockpuppetry, redirect services, SEO's, open proxies, Joe jobbing, etc.), for some it is their job, for others it is the way to earn money. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:51, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
just like blacklisting, de-blacklisting does not have to be 'indef'... lets keep an eye .. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:58, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See (two discussions that were tracked):

Sockpuppetry/coi spamming of about 2 years ago. A long time ago + good use .. lets try and have a look. minus Removed (but if it gets spammed too much, we may have to use this net again and go to specific whitelisting). --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:48, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Examiner.com

I found the only link (so far) to provide support for MMA fighter

Zoila Frausto's nickname and this has been the only source I have found to support the claim that her nickname came from Xena: Warrior Princess. I'll keep looking for another source that states the same information.I didn't find this website on either list listed as examiner.com so it may be on here already.(MgTurtle (talk) 02:15, 27 March 2010 (UTC)).[reply
]

Due to past problems, the spam incentive, it being a unreliable source, etc., de-blacklisting of the domain is no Declined, but you can ask for whitelisting on a specific link on examiner.com on the whitelist, so  Defer to Whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:24, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hellotxt.com

Can you tell me why the web service/social aggregator Hellotxt is blocked as a link? —Preceding unsigned comment added by RoRoHello (talk • contribs) 15:10, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted on meta (not here), URL-shortener (see m:Talk:Spam_blacklist&oldid=1715863#Lots_o.27_URL_shorteners). Please use the normal link and not these services. no Declined. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:02, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I don't understand. I am an employee at Hellotxt, and I want to create a page that explains and documents the service. It blocks me from doing this, since I want to include web address. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RoRoHello (talk • contribs) 09:25, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that is something different. I would suggest you to create the page (you may want to start in your userspace, e.g. User:RoRoHello/hellotxt.com) without the link. Then you can ask to whitelist the specific homepage (e.g. hellotxt.com/about.htm) so that can be used as the external link. You can then include the link that is whitelisted, and the page can be moved to mainspace.
I don't think the whole site will be de-blacklisted, as it is (apparently) basically a redirect service which can be used to point to other websites of which use is prohibited (they may even be blacklisted). You might want to read
the business FAQ before proceeding. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:03, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Ok thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by RoRoHello (talk • contribs) 10:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So for the specific link,  Defer to Whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:13, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

444flower.com

For use in the article

444 Flower Building aka Citigroup Center (Los Angeles). --emerson7 06:16, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Can some Regex expert take a look at this? I see no specific entry for this domain on either this blacklist or the meta blacklist however some regex entry is blocking it.
This is a benign domain and appropriate for this article. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:17, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is due to [0-9]+flower\.com on the global blacklist. I'll have a look into it further if I get chance but someone else might want to do so as well. Adambro (talk) 18:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done I've removed the entry from the global blacklist. It dated back to 2004 and was amongst the earliest revisions of that list. Since there is no background on why it was added, it is very old, and it is getting in the way of this appropriate link, I've removed it. Adambro (talk) 18:47, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/April_2010&oldid=1108558729"