User talk:XLinkBot/RevertList/archives/June 2012

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

Handled additions

coolspotters.com

Site composed solely of user-generated content sometimes linked as ELs or cited as a source. (no current links from article namespace after manual removals). -- Rrburke (talk) 00:34, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:50, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

chemistrydaily.com

chemistrydaily.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 - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

WP

Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks/Abc#Chemistry Daily. (no current links from article namespace after manual removals). -- Rrburke (talk) 00:34, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

hardly spammed, but I'll add this to keep it clean. plus Added. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:53, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

studio737.com and shopunicef.ca

Being used by what appear to be dynamic ips (

talk) 15:51, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

See Wikipedia:Long-term abuse#The Terry Ananny Spammer (User:Ananny) for history of this spammer. -DJSasso (talk) 18:48, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Has not been added since reporting. But adding, as I can see the problem. plus Added. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:55, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ciims.net & supercoach-advice.com

Two blogs run by same person. Part of promotional spamming by multiple ips and one account. See

talk) 03:32, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

No additions since reported here.
Stale
. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:40, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

absoluteastronomy.com and economicexpert.com

See

WP:SBL#absoluteastronomy.com and economicexpert.com. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Bit stale, should this be on the revertlist or the one for references? --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:43, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

datasynergy.co.uk

Has been added to several computer articles by various users:

Stale
. Does not seem to have been added since reporting (??). --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:57, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mangafox.com

A well known hub of copyright that has recently been in the anime and manga community news.[5] It is possibly the second large scanlation website after onemanga.com. While the website has somewhat cleaned up it act by removing manga scans of titles already released in English, there has been reports that the website contains several viruses, even an anti-virus virus.[6][7][8] I've and a couple of editors form

WP:ANIME routinely remove links to Mangafox when we come across them or decided to check the external links special page. —Farix (t | c) 14:52, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

If it is a viral website, this should have gone to meta blacklist immediately.  Defer to Global blacklist ?? --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:58, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hockeyfights.com

Should be excluded per

WP:RS
. -- Rrburke (talk) 18:14, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

copyright violations, I see it used as a reference ...  Defer to Local blacklist or  Defer to Global blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:00, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

cotswolds.info

Should be excluded as a low-value tourist directory for the

talk) 13:22, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Not really spammed, see different (including regular) users using this (though it is not linked from mainspace anymore). What edits would you like see reverted? --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:01, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

answers.com

Widely used as a source and for ELs, and while some content is drawn from reliable sources (example), a great deal more is drawn from more dubious sources whose editorial standards are less clear. Includes much content mirrored from Wikipedia (example, linked from

WP:RS. -- Rrburke (talk) 21:14, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Should we revert EL's to this site, or references .. or both? --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:27, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ghdhairs.com

This is a copy-cat website of the valid site ghdhair.com for China made fake products to be sold. The site has a long history of being added to Good Hair Day and GHD Group (plus random other articles such as straightener by sockpuppets and more recently by anon IPs. Further background on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/027wh/Archive and for an example IP vandal see 220.161.98.173 (talk · contribs · logs · block log). Fæ (talk) 01:34, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:24, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

neelwafurat.com

This is a legitimate Arabic-language website that is basically the same as amazon.com. I just helped a newbie from the Arabic Wikipedia write the article, however in the process, I noticed a number of articles where newbies and other editors had used a link to a book listing there as a reference to support claims made in the article. Amazon doesn't satisfy

WP:RS, so neither does this site. I have manually removed all the references to it in reflists and other inappropriate places. I'm not sure if this is possible: it does have a legitimate use on the neelwafurat.com and amazon.com articles, possibly elsewhere as an internal wikilink, the problem is in people adding external links. Can the bot revert additions to the URL plus subpages (for example [[9]] and [[10]]? Or in some other way disallow people from inserting it into articles without preventing folks from using it as a legitimate entry (for example, the article itself is named neelwafurat.com)? Burpelson AFB (talk) 23:14, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

I don't think that this is sufficiently spammed to be necessary here. I only see a small number of additions, and mainspace is clean at the moment. I would say, that going every now and then through Special:LinkSearch/*.neelwafurat.com should keep it clean enough. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:35, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bringvictory.com

Rickrolls anyone who clicks on it. -- Gridlock Joe (talk) 02:20, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is blacklisted locally. Hence, no Declined. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:37, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Several "press release" websites

All are websites which allow anyone to anonymously write up and present press releases and news stories without any fact checking or proof.

The Birmingham Post. Clearly open to potential abuse, especially as this hoax and its reference remained unnoticed since June. The359 (Talk) 07:27, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Added via COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:46, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Designer drug website

These 5 IPs have all spammed this website for a company manufacturing novel designer drugs in the last month. (Wasn't sure whether it should be blacklisted or blocked here instead). SmartSE (talk) 00:27, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted on ru.wp =>  Defer to Global blacklist MER-C 07:10, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks SmartSE (talk) 10:27, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Amazon redirect links amzn.to

78.21.14.21 (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)
78.21.240.194 (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)
Aklasur (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)
71.246.114.245 (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)
213.155.151.239 (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)
71.128.142.135 (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)
81.132.187.115 (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)

Cleaned them up on en. Probably should be added to the Global blacklist with the other redirectors....--Hu12 (talk) 17:13, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, redirects are
WP:ELNEVER -  Defer to Global blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:52, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

gasammo.com - sales only site

Periodically gasammo.com gets added to firearms article.[11] The site exists only to sell ammo, etc. They don't provide any further information whatsoever. I think it could safely get added to this list. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 20:42, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

emma-stone.bz - fansite of Emma Stone

 Defer to Global blacklist: m:Talk:Spam blacklist#Adsense pub-8963405992835804 MER-C 02:26, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

fantasticfiction.co.uk

Per discussion at

WP:ANI (see perma-link here]). Site that acts as a portal to sales links. Used on a large number of articles, presumably done in good-faith as a place-holder when a reliable source is lacking. Consensus is that the site generally lacks usability in Wikipedia article - but no evidence of concerted abuse has yet been located. So, requesting addition to XLinkBot instead of blacklist. --- Barek (talk) - 20:35, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

plus Added --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:11, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thelokolist.com and fourlokostories.com

These two inappropriate external links have been repeatedly added by multiple IPs to

Four (energy drink). There is consensus among registered users who keep removing them that they don't belong. Here are a couple of examples from just the past day or so. Peacock (talk) 00:32, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

plus Added --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:12, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

grandtheft5.ucoz.com

IP user persistently removing reliable reference and switching it to link to this fansite which has no established reliablity. Article has been protected, user resumes activity after protection expires. - X201 (talk) 09:39, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ucoz.com is already reverted, however, these are inside references. I would suggest to  Defer to Local blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:42, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Thanks. - X201 (talk) 10:18, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

shufra.com

IP user replacing links to the Simplified Technical English standard with links to shufra.com, a company that sells STE services. This is infrequent enough that semi-protection would not be warranted. Several editors, myself included, have reverted these adds going back months. We have tried to engage the user on the Talk Page (q.v. link above), who denies being affiliated with the company. User did not respond to the COI/N complaint (q.v. link above) resulting in a 1-week semi of the article. As the last addition of this link did not get caught for a couple weeks due to the holidays, I feel XLinxBot's attention is warranted here. Thanks! ArakunemTalk 17:29, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:19, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed removals

patch.com

Proposing removal of \bpatch.com\b from the revertlist. This site may have been used by spammers, but I think it's a legitimate news site that can reasonably be used as sourcing. Some XLinkBot reversions that I think shouldn't have been performed:

If the motivation for this rule is to prohibit from people adding Patch.com links indiscriminately to "External links" sections as in [18], [19] or [20], perhaps the rule could be changed to \bpatch.com/[^a] since it appears that any legitimate use of the site to provide a reference will be at *.patch.com/articles/...

talk) 21:30, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

I'll adapt, lets see what happens. I see your point in the diffs provided. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:04, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Troubleshooting and problems

not reverting standardsdirect.org?

I added this to the revert list yesterday.[21]

Today an IP added this link back, but XLinkBot did not revert it.[22]

Did I format something incorrectly? --A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:07, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, the bot does not revert 'undo' and similar reverts. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:10, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

wrong syntax

Hi!
I don't know, what was tried to repair here, but e.g. the regexp

[a-z][0-9]+\.photobucket\.com\/albums\/.*\.[jpg|jpeg|gif|png|svg]

is equivalent to

[a-z][0-9]+\.photobucket\.com\/albums\/.*\.[efgijnpsv|]

so I guess, you wanted

[a-z][0-9]+\.photobucket\.com\/albums\/.*\.(?:jpg|jpeg|gif|png|svg)

-- seth (talk) 22:12, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I repaired the first 6 entries. Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

regexp speed-up

I did some work on the list. The result is ready for copy&paste: user:lustiger_seth/sbl_XLinkBot_revlist.
What I did:

  1. searched for /\\[^.b?]/ and similar things and repaired them
  2. deleted redundant regexps
  3. grouped regexps like "foobarbaz" and "fooquux" to "foo(?:barbaz|quux)"

The list got about 10% shorter. -- seth (talk) 15:22, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

updated. -- seth (talk) 19:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
updated again. it would be just a copy&paste-action. -- seth (talk) 17:16, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
...again... and still waiting... :-) -- seth (talk) 16:55, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
... heh, sorry, not behind a secure connection at the moment. I'll poke Beetstra ;-) .. --Beetstra (public) (Dirk BeetstraT C on public computers) 12:33, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, Cardinal! Poke him with the soft cushions! -- seth (talk) 13:31, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I updated the list. Lets see if the bots now crash! --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:00, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Matching based on word boundaries?

I noticed that most of these entries start with \b, which isn't exactly a reliable test; if someone were to post a link on a Wiki page to a blog permalink, for example, with the blacklisted URL in it, it would be removed.

For example:
The rule: \byoutube\.com
Matches: http://www.example.com/blog/youtube.com_imposes_new_age_restrictions/

We should really be matching based on a more traditional URL scheme. Yonisyuumei (talk) 20:37, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This will not happen very often, and the blacklists will have the same problem. And pretty difficult to solve. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:28, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Couldn't the regex just check for no additional slashes between the "//" and the "youtube.com"? I know how to do it in Python re.compile(r'//[^/]*youtube\.com'), but I'm not as familiar with Perl. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 22:08, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Discussion

Question

Hi.

U) 15:59, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Help with Regex

I was trying to get something done with AWB and needed some help with Regex. Would you or someone you know be able to help me with this? Cheers

talk) 05:15, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Reserved Domains

Please hard-exclude specific domains form the Blacklist.

For example, don't blacklist example.com, since it ist commonly used for exmplanatory purpose in technical articles. see Example.com and RFC 2606 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.89.226.146 (talk • contribs) 03:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

spamlists search log entries

"no log defined for this project. "

I've asked seth for help here, w/XLinkBot logs to be searchable.--Hu12 (talk) 15:43, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why are groups.yahoo.com automatically reverted but not groups.google.com

Just curious. Ottawahitech (talk) 00:30, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to keep harping on this same issue - however, it does appear that Google Groups are given preferential treatment over Yahoo Groups. For example, [this section] which uses two external links to Google Groups has been allowed, while links to similar Yahoo Groups are not:

There is nothing disallowed here, and I am afraid that it is just a matter of

WP:OTHERLINKS (though in a bit different form). I hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra T C 21:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

I am afraid I don't understand your explanation - you have referred me to a page discussing spam which is not what I was asking about. However, I am glad I did get your attention. Ottawahitech (talk) 13:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well .. easy. You ask, "why is groups.yahoo.com automatically reverted but not groups.google.com?". We noticed that groups.yahoo.com was spammed, we may not have noticed that groups.google.com was spammed. There is no malice in the fact that something is reverted and something else not .. that has NOTHING to do with preference for one site, it is a

WP:OTHERLINKS
).

Your example is the article

Yahoo Groups#Outages
, then there may be an explanation for that.

I take it from your explanation that you work for Yahoo? --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:06, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No I don't work for Yahoo :-) I have been a member of Yahoo! Groups since ~2002 and have seen some excellent content posted there over the years. I am also a long time member of Google Groups. So no, I don't see why Wikipedia automatically reverts links to YG but not links to GG. The quality of the content has more to do with the authour/ Group moderators, than with whether it is YG or GG. Just my $.02 Ottawahitech (talk) 10:21, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I said, maybe we have not noticed yet that google groups site was abused or spammed, while we have seen it of yahoo groups. There has been a recent discussion on the moderation of these sites, and that varies greatly. Some are really properly moderated, most are just moderated to remove unrelated post (or profanity etc.) but for the rest anyone can say anything there, some are completely crap. Such sites still fail

WP:EL). --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:41, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

I did not understand your last sentence, and I am not familar wtih xlinkbot reverts. Are you saying we can override these reverts? Ottawahitech (talk) 04:58, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, undo the revert, or re-do the revert immediately after the bot. Or autoconfirmed editors can add the link. This is not the MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:39, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:XLinkBot/RevertList/archives/June_2012&oldid=1140955851"