MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/March 2016

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Proposed additions

unitedmedicalcredit.com

unitedmedicalcredit.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

plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:31, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

dcm.in

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

Seems to contain harmful content (i.e. malware, malicious scripts, or trojan exploits). I've removed three links to this site on two occasions, two and one respectively, per WP:ELNO #3. I don't believe those adding them have ill-intent, I assume they either don't realize the content is possibly harmful, or I myself am mistaken.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 18:46, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Request withdrawn —Godsy(TALKCONT) 01:10, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

filmymantra.com

filmymantra.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

60.254.12.66 (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)

Swatisharma3193 (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)

This is still continuing at this time of my report.The Avengers (talk) 12:24, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Another user:
Enough warnings unheeded. plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:34, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

sumax.de

sumax.de: 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

  • Spamming by multiple single-use accounts, e.g.:

[[2]], [3]], [[4]] Mean as custard (talk) 20:17, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added MER-C 12:11, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

lawncaresucks.com

lawncaresucks.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

  • Spamming by multiple single-use accounts, e.g.:

[[5]], [[6]], [[7]]. . . Mean as custard (talk) 14:39, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Xenoradixde. plus Added MER-C 11:27, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Moivaonhatoi.com

Currently being discussed at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Moivaonhatoi.com_ref_spamming. Links to the website of a Vietnamese interior construction firm have been spammed into many unrelated articles by multiple accounts. Just blatant spamming. Deli nk (talk) 17:12, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added --- Barek (talk • contribs) -

www.durianproperty.com.my

The website www.durianproperty.com.my is a Malaysian real estate website. In recent weeks I have noticed this website being inserted as if it were an encyclopedic reference, when in fact it just refers back to commercial property listings and provides nothing in the way of encyclopedic content.

As one example, see 219.92.40.108 (talk · contribs) who proceeds to insert links back to this website in serial. If there are any additional questions or concerns please do not hesitate to ping me or leave a message on my talk page.

Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 21:37, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The LinkSearch tool [8] shows that there are 497 articles on the English Wikipedia linking back to this website (www.durianproperty.com.my) at present. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 21:41, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Since my initial report I noticed that approximately a dozen new links back to www.durianproperty.com.my had been added. Examples of IP addresses inserting these external links include:

It appears that these ranges are being used primarily for the purpose of spamming at this time. While these may be dynamically assigned IP addresses, there is also evidence of an IP going dormant for a few weeks and then returning to carry on with the same behavior, as with 219.92.42.86. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 01:41, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've hardblocked both /24 ranges for one year for ref spamming. The contribs for 2015 out of both ranges were primarily that.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 14:22, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Have just hardblocked the 43 range where I see them using it today. Search contribs.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 15:38, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Found 115.135.77.126 (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)
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 16:16, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
219.92.43.0/24 hardblocked one year.
DurianProperty (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)
plus Added MER-C 20:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

skyscrapercity.com

skyscrapercity.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

As detailed in[9], this site is extensively used in mainspace despite being a forum and thus not suitable as a source of information. I woud've just done it myself right away, but that would affect lots of pages so posting here for review instead. Max Semenik (talk) 01:43, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Max Semenik: I would suggest to first clean, it looks indeed like there are hundreds/thousands of pages that are going to be affected. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:48, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse blacklist of this domain, which is by definition an internet forum. There are approximately 1,900 links back to skyscrapercity.com (with no valid use case scenario) which need to be removed. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 20:16, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse blacklisting. @MaxSem and Beetstra: I would suggest doing the blacklisting first so that we can't be reverted by the spammers or even well-meaning editors. The scale of this is such that we don't want to have to combat IPs restoring the links before we can get them clean since it will take a significant length of time.
     — Berean Hunter (talk) 20:11, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note that while using skyscrapercity.com as as source is unacceptable, there is however legitimate use in external links (mainly for visual illustration purposes). So the automated removal should be restricted to cases where it is actually used as a source (in particular footnotes)--Kmhkmh (talk) 04:07, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

reprevive.com

Spamming by multiple socks. The following articles were spammed by four accounts all created, added one spam link to reprevive.com, added one word to their user and talk pages. The spam link was usually replacing a citation needed. All events took place within a one hour period.

National Federation of Independent Business diff
Reputation diff
Customer feedback management services diff
Customer delight diff

I warned twice, but an external links search suggested a sock pattern, so I did not warn two. Jim1138 (talk) 06:51, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:11, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not this shit again. Sigh. MER-C 08:07, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

800cad.com

spammed in various CAD- and architecture-related articles by

Continued after final warning. GermanJoe (talk) 12:46, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:09, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

lovifm.com

Per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Alex9777777/Archive, heavy sockpuppeting since November to promote this non-notable online radio station. --McGeddon (talk) 12:24, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added MER-C 05:23, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

yourstory.in

Sister domain of yourstory.com (already blacklisted, see archive), directly redirects to .com to the same content. GermanJoe (talk) 21:53, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Still working on cleanup. Almost all links have exactly the same problems: questionable independence and expertise. As mentioned in the COIN discussion, they are thinly veiled PR stories for borderline-notable business ventures - in the vast majority of cases written by bloggers, part-time freelancers and other "start-up enthusiasts". GermanJoe (talk) 12:56, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Done cleanup (except non-article entries amd 2 borderline remainders). GermanJoe (talk) 01:30, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See [10] and MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/October 2015#YourStory.com. plus Added MER-C 03:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

filmyfolks.com

filmyfolks.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

Don't know who is spamming them. Exists in lots of articles with few page watchers. Top actors of Bollywood have fan following and popularity, so it's difficlut to spam wesbites in articles of top celebrities. But new actors who did a few flop movies or supporting roles have few page watchers and it's easy to spam the links. --The Avengers (talk) 09:04, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This website is always used to create pages of new actors and there are lots of copyright violation reports in link search. --The Avengers (talk) 10:18, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any encyclopedic value to FILMYFOLKS.COM whatsoever? I see that it is spammed to biographical and film-related Wikipedia articles regularly. Are there any circumstances where this external link would serve any purpose here? For example, IMDb is disallowed as a reference here for biographical content, but is normally allowed as a supporting reference for a filmography listings. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 19:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any value to FilmyFolks.com. It's yet another faceless blog run by who-knows-whom. There's no presumption of accuracy, no established reputation for fact-checking, they don't even have an About us page. This site is problematic since they include filmyfolks.com/celebrity/bollywood/zarine-khan.php biographical details that may be grossly inaccurate. This means we'd be opening Wikipedia to BLP liabilities. One minor correction, Yamaguchi先生, IMDb is only occasionally allowed as a supporting ref for filmography, typically only when there are credits confirmed with film guilds. For example this film has a WGA (Writers Guild of America) sign-off, and IMDb appears to have verified the cast as well. Otherwise, WP:RS/IMDB strongly discourages the use. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Cyphoidbomb for your additional comments. It is my understanding that this domain is being inserted en masse to various Wikipedia articles, and is not suitable as either an external link or a reliable source. If there are no further objections, I endorse the proposition to add this domain to the English Wikipedia blacklist. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 22:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I equally endorse, and I wish there were a non-spam blacklist for sites that the community has deemed unreliable. That would save an amazing amount of volunteer time by excluding persistently problematic references. I think I'm going to pitch this at the Village Pump, but I suspect I'll be mocked out of town... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:44, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Cyphoidbomb: Given that there is no suitable encyclopedic value to this link, and it is frequently being utilized by inexperienced editors as a reference, perhaps this should be added to User:XLinkBot/RevertList as opposed to the spam blacklist? Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 02:33, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yamaguchi先生 I'd be fine with that, and I'm grateful that you pointed me in the direction of the XLinkBot, since I'm encountering tons of sites lately that would require hoop-jumping for SPAM that might better be zapped by XLinkBot. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:47, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
\bfilmyfolks\.com\b regex has now been added to the User:XLinkBot/RevertLists. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you find evidence of users attempting to circumvent the bot for any reason. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 22:52, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist as well, due to persistent spamming which XLinkBot was unable to resolve. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 23:04, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ebharat.in

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

In 20 pages, i found them added together. filmyfolks is just below ebharat.

And this user admits that he has created ebharat website

User:Vinayras

Another user promting ebharat.in User talk:Umesh kumar sharma

  • Observation: a few "filmy" sites seem to have popped up here. Filmybase.com was a site I'd asked to be added to the blacklist a couple of weeks ago, Avengers has reported Filmymantra and now Filmyfolks.com. Not sure what that means, but it's worth noting. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:55, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Cyphoidbomb: I would appreciate if you check my sandbox.
Articles about popular Bollywood actors are under watchlist of experienced editors. Bollywood movies are watched by many users. It's difficult for them to spam here and get unnoticed. What they do is spam them in less popular TV actors'page. As these pages new TV actors and are watched by two/three users, they can easily spam the website. After that they try to move on to articles of new young Bollywood actors as Kartik Aaryan. The Avengers (talk) 17:34, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist, due to link promotion/spamming. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 19:26, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

bankifscode.in

Persistent spammer since August 2015, claims he is "improving" articles when in fact sneakily adds domain with summary "fixing broken link". See here, here, here and here. – Brianhe (talk) 10:26, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (Help!) 19:54, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

diasporaengager.com

self-promotional spam (and WP:COATRACK additions) by

Continued after repeated warnings. See also [11], the homepage of this "international consultant". GermanJoe (talk) 09:20, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rayholou blanked this request. MER-C 13:14, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Plus promotion for own book. GermanJoe (talk) 13:35, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (Help!) 19:48, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

downloadfeast.com

all spammed by

Spam cleaned up. Please block the IP as well (professional spammer with a long history, see IP contributions). No non-spam contributions under this IP. GermanJoe (talk) 11:45, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for 6 years... which is about the time this IP has been spamming us for. MER-C 04:06, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. Downloadfeast appears to bring a serious risk of contributory ocpyright infringement. --Guy (Help!) 19:45, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

myrhinoplastysurgeon.com

  1. myrhinoplastysurgeon.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
  2. myrhinoplastysurgeon.blogspot.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
  3. and others.

We're having some (relatively minor) issues on Rhinoplasty and related pages. Here are a few examples:

  1. Rhinoplasty on Jan 5 by User:J34542121
  2. Rhinoplasty on Jan 5 by User:J34542121
  3. Rhinoplasty on Oct 28 by User:J345421
  4. Rhinoplasty on Oct 28 by User:J345421
  5. Rhinoplasty in April by User:Ibs3709
  6. Rhinoplasty in April by User:Ibs3709
  7. Rhinoplasty in April by User:Ibs3709
  8. Rhinoplasty in April by User:Ibs3709
  9. Rhinoplasty in Feb by User:Xfactormedia
  10. Rhinoplasty in December '14 by User:Medicontributor
  11. Rhinoplasty in December '14 by User:Medicontributor
  12. Rhinoplasty in December '14 by User:Medicontributor
  13. Rhinoplasty in September '14 by User:Medicontributor
  14. Rhinoplasty in September '14 by User:Medicontributor

This sort of spam extends to other plastic surgery articles as well, such as:

  1. Dermabrasion in April by User:Ibs3709
  2. Dermabrasian in June by User:Ibs3709
  3. Nose in June by User:Ibs3709

Note that none of those editors were blocked (or even warned), because these are low-traffic pages not often patrolled. RfPP seems like a good option for some of the pages, but my concern is with edits #3 and #4 on my list above. There appears to be an effort to get these links into the page history, even if they don't show up on the current page. I'm wondering if it is worth blacklisting these links to avoid that effort, or submitting them to xlinkbot to discourage this kind of editing long-term. Many of these links could not possibly be used as a source or EL.

I'm really just looking for input. This is admittedly relatively minor in terms of edit count, but I'm not sure whether it's worthwhile to head of the problem, since in the past it has quickly spread from one protected article to another that's not protected. Thoughts? Thanks.   — Jess· Δ♥ 02:48, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (Help!) 00:21, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

jimcorbettnationalpark.co.in

  1. jimcorbettnationalpark.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 - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
  2. dudhwanationalpark.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 - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

Tour operator persistently tries, using multiple accounts, to replace the official government Web site for the Jim Corbett National Park in Nainital, Uttarakhand, India, http://corbettonline.uk.gov.in/, with a commercial site created to book tours and other travel services. General Ization Talk 13:42, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinitely semi-protected, the other IP/non-autoconfirmed edits on that page are mostly garbage. MER-C 12:13, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Spamming continued, plus an additional domain. plus Added. MER-C 10:36, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

dollartacticalsupply.com

spamming (and copyright violation of some of the original sources) by

See this diff - dead link spamming for their commercial website. Cleaned up already. GermanJoe (talk) 04:26, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added MER-C 12:06, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

homesthetics.net

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

  • Spamming by multiple single-use accounts, e.g.: [[12]],

[[13]], [[14]], [[15], [[16]] Mean as custard (talk) 22:04, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also fake reference spamming. plus Added. MER-C 02:37, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

mrperfect.dk

mrperfect.dk: 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

  • Spamming by multiple single-use accounts, e.g.:

[[17]], [[18]], [[19]], [[20]] Mean as custard (talk) 10:49, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:01, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

searchfordrivinglessons.co.uk

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

  • Spamming by multiple single-use accounts, e.g.:

[[21]], [[22]], [[23]], [[24]] Mean as custard (talk) 11:48, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added. See also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lucynolza. MER-C 03:10, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

promo-seo.co.uk etc.

[[25]], [[26]], [[27]], [[28]], [[29]], [[30]], [[31]], [[32]], [[33]], [[34]], [[35]], [[36]], [[37]], [[38]] Mean as custard (talk) 15:55, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added MER-C 03:10, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

crashsafari.com

Site in the news (other link) for taking advantage of errors in Webkit browsers to create an infinite loop that will crash a device. It says only mobile devices like iOS devices and Webkit Android browsers are affected, but Google Chrome on PC took mine down tonight when I decided to test it; obviously there is no foreseen use for this site (which hopefully will get 404'ed by the webhost soon) outside of vandals trying to sneak by incorrect links in a Rickrolling-like nusiance. Nate • (chatter) 08:51, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Defer to Global blacklist (will be done in a minute). --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:55, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
plus Added to meta. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:46, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

findagrave.com

  1. findagrave.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
  2. Wikihil123 (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)

"Find A Grave" is a privately owned usercontributed/usergenerated website that is clearly not a reliable source by Wikipedia's standards, and that is being actively spammed. A check of a few links I found doing a link search showed that it had once been searched for and reverted by XLinkBot, but apparently no longer is (see message on User talk:PL Taylor). A check also found that it has been actively spammed for a long time, both as refspam and as linkspam, often with multiple links being added per article ([51], [52]). The links have also been added on articles where they're clearly not needed, such as on articles about military personnel who were buried at Arlington National Cemetery, and where there already was a link to that cemetery in the article, which in my book is a clear case of spamming. "Wikihil123" has added links to them on around 100 articles, in spite of being told multiple times that it's not a reliable site (see messages on their talk page), but just keeps going, having added links on another 15-20 articles yesterday and today. It's also clearly not a new user, as evidenced by the fact that their very first edit added a perfectly formatted reflink to "findagrave.com". Thomas.W talk 14:05, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Some additional information about"findagrave.com". It's a privately owned ([53]) money-generating ([54]) user-contributed/user-generated ([55]) website, where anyone can add information, all you need to do is create a free account there. And with 400,000 members/contributors ([56]) there's no way they can check the information. Meaning that they have an incentive for spamming (to get more traffic and through that earn more money), and that the site clearly isn't WP:RS. Thomas.W talk 17:42, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done This is a very popular website, having it's own article here on Wikipedia. There are tons of links to it all over the encyclopedia, just like there are to Discogs, which is also a user-submitted site not accepted as a reliable source. I don't believe this is a good candidate for the spam blacklist as links to it can be used constructively, but maybe XLinkBot could help with misuse as a reference — MusikAnimal talk 18:01, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Findagrave.com is a reliable source for locations of cemeteries and pictures of grave markers. I would regard its text information as only a guideline... just as Wikipedia itself is. In fact, often the text on Findagrave, for famous persons, has been lifted from Wikipedia, albeit typically with attribution. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:02, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hence it is totally appropriate as an external link, but probably not as a "reference" embedded in an article. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:04, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It is common to provide it as an external link where we have no image of the grave marker. It can be a reliable source for the writing on grave markers. Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:22, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • The problem is that User:Thomas.W is removing both the link to Findagrave and the underlying information that the person in question is buried on that cemetery. If he thinks the attribution is in error, he should be replacing the wrong cemetery with the proper cemetery, and not removing the information completely. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 02:26, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • I disagree with that - it is not necessarily the task of the editor who removes a piece of text that is unreliably sourced to replace it with something reliably sourced. The information on findagrave may very well be correct, it is not reliable, and Thomas.W is right in removing the unreliably sourced information - you can not count on that information to say that someone is burried on said cemetary, the only thing that is reasonably reliable is the information on the pictures (but even there, how do you know that the stone on the picture is belonging to the subject at hand). --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:31, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since there's no realistic chance of blacklisting, but it's clearly not a reliable source, this belongs at the reliable source noticeboard not here. Guy (Help!) 10:23, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@JzG: It has already been at WP:RSN, time and time again over many years, each time being found to be non-RS, but nothing happens, the links are still being added. Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), who has commented here, is one of the main supporters of "findagrave.com", BTW, to the extent that he has a restriction put on him, banning him from adding links to pages he has created himself on "findagrave.com" (his attempts to circumvent that ban are currently being discussed at WP:AE, in case you're interested...). Thomas.W talk 11:07, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No poisoning the well please. You are ascribing to me a motive: You wrote that I am making "attempts to circumvent that ban" which I find libelous. The ban says that I cannot link to articles that I create at Findagrave from Wikipedia. Wikidata demands that I link to Findagrave, and I do so. We link to Wikidata from Wikipedia. Saying that this violates the ban is a improper application of the transitive property. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 16:28, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) I do agree here with JzG - findagrave does have a place on Wikipedia, though with a lot of care. Also, this is not a spam problem (I don't think this has been added en masse by one account for promotional purposes, but rather a good faith use by a multitude of editors). For those reasons, blacklisting no Declined, and deferred to WP:RS/N for sources, and WP:EL/N for external links (note that this is already on Wikipedia:External_links/Perennial_websites#Find-a-Grave, where it is marked as 'rarely suitable as an external link' and 'almost never suitable as a reference' - a guideline based on many discussions about this site on mentioned noticeboards).
  • After edit conflict - however, being 'just' a non-reliable source is never a reason to put it on the blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:13, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

urbanpk.com

This is a web forum which has been egregiously refspammed throughout the English Wikipedia. With the offending links now under the 100 threshold, I am proposing to add this domain to the blacklist. If there are no objections, I will add the host to the blacklist by 1 February 2016. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 22:54, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist, due to link promotion/spamming. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 21:57, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

circlemakers.org

spammed by

Used as reference spam just to slip it into various articles. Emotionalllama (talk) 17:07, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also fake citation spamming. plus Added MER-C 01:42, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Emotionalllama, MER-C, and JzG: .. see MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/October_2015#circlemakers.org ... I am afraid you gave people what they wanted. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:20, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I do see non-spammy use of this site being done as well, as well as a cross-wiki effort. And I do note, that the diff that MER-C is mentioning is out of a series of additions by Special:Contributions/78.250.92.101, which all appear strange for a for-profit spammer. Similar remark is made in the previous blacklisting request Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2015_Archive_Jan_1. This may need a global filter specific on these IPs, or a harshly set up XLinkBot revertlist entry. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:34, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'll remove this if sufficient alternate arrangements are made to stop this behaviour. MER-C 11:22, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
plus Added to User:XLinkBot/RevertList. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:33, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Emotionalllama, MER-C, and JzG: After above, I have also added this to the override list (resulting that the bot will revert to itself, reverts on undo's etc.), and to the level overrule (level 4, meaning the bot's first warning is a spam3, second revert a spam4, and then to AIV). These settings may result in a few cases where a genuine IP is getting bashed (but there are very few additions outside of the spammers, and even less by new/IP editors), but I hope that admins do follow link to the Note for Admins that XLinkBot leaves when reporting to AIV. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:51, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
minus Removed MER-C 12:02, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, folks, for a diligent job well done. Guy (Help!) 12:36, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In any case, if these IPs return, no need to wait for AIV. Next thing might be a local edit filter on the (big) IP range - they do also non-linked spamming. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:02, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

myfreegems.com

Link is "Clash of Clans free gems hack" which has been spammed onto a few pages, such as Clan.
Has been added by

 Defer to Global blacklist MER-C 06:12, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

contactlesspaymentcards.com

contactlesspaymentcards.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

  • Spamming by multiple single-use accounts, e.g.:

[[57]],[[58]],[[59]], [[60]] Mean as custard (talk) 10:01, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added MER-C 11:43, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

wacix.com

wacix.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

  • Spamming by multiple single-use accounts, e.g.:

[[61]], [[62]], [[63]], [[64]] Mean as custard (talk) 10:43, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clear sockfarm, users blocked, links plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:57, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

populartoday.biz

populartoday.biz: 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 Several new accounts and IPs have been adding links to this website to different Television shows [65] [66], some users have already been reported to WP:SPI Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Isla Riordan . McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 03:42, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is already blacklisted locally, and is pending addition globally. MER-C 07:41, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

googletop10results.com

Repeated spam for SEO in several articles - spam links have been removed. GermanJoe (talk) 19:27, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added MER-C 08:27, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

assignmentsolution.net

Useless nonsense website added by an IP-shifting spammer here and here. bd2412 T 14:41, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added MER-C 03:00, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

977.by

Repeated sockpuppet spamming per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Alex9777777/Archive. --McGeddon (talk) 11:05, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added MER-C 11:07, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

top.howfn.com

Not a reliable source or EL but is being spammed into WP. Jytdog (talk) 11:56, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Defer to Global blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:49, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed removals

fuzzfaced.net

How can the site be useful I thought that some info about Stratocasters and Marshall could be useful (because Wiki pages of JTM45, Origin of the Stratocasters, Strat Plus and Clapton Strat are not 100% correct). I have read a lot of books about instruments and I've made fuzzfaced.net to explain the story of the Strat and of the Marshall amps. Plus, fuzzfaced.net gives useful and detailed informations to date Stratocasters and analyze their serials.

Why it should not be blacklisted I am sorry about that, I didn't want to spam. I put some links to my website, but I didn't want to spam. However, if you want, I will never link it anymore. But please, remonve blacklist from my site. It's very important to me.  Not done It's not blacklisted in the first place, it was simply reverted by a spam bot. If you resume adding it, however, it will be added to the blacklist. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:15, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

earpixels.com

earpixels.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 Please, Please help me to remove this link from wikipedia's spam..I am not just able to known even the single reason behind why this link is there as a spam link..please help me..my website is my everything..and i do not know who is that stupid person who have been the reason behind adding links of my website that is a music social network..to this wikipedia and now when i have tried to add my first time link of my website that also to the official profile of somebody then it says..it is spam...ADMINS it is my humble request to you..you please atleast review my websit eonce..you will known everything yourself..please atleast once...give me a chance !! PLEASE....Please ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.82.9 (talk • contribs)

no Declined. We don't de-list a website at the request of its owner. If a trusted high-volume contributor makes such a request, we will consider it. ~Amatulić (talk) 07:30, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Iotworm.com (removal request)

My site link was blacklisted 2 months back because I was not having any idea of Wikipedia policy. Now I have read all the link policy information, I am guaranteeing you that this will not happen again. Please remove my site link from blacklist. Site URL: Iotworm.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.176.154.88 (talk) 11:41, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You say you had no idea, but it did not come into your consideration that every time your links were removed, that there was a reason. I mean, you re-inserted them what, 20, 30 times? no Declined --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:20, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done You probably should have gotten an idea before attempting to spam your site from 8 different IP addresses and 2 named accounts. OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:59, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Timesofbook.com

I would like to say, timesofbook.com should be remove from blacklist. Its a very useful website which is provide more info about books and its specifications. I can say its right time to remove from blacklist so that users can add like below useful information url's into wiki and its a big help to others users. timesofbook.com/2015/03/explain-how-sbi-irctc-quick-pay-service.html

Apart from this this website having technology tutorials like PHP which should help for students and learners also PHP beginners. timesofbook.com/search/label/PHP%20Tutorial

My consideration it should be in whitelist. Common dude anyone can remove from blacklist. Thanks in advance :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.89.154.131 (talk • contribs)

Yeah that's not going to happen [67]. -KH-1 (talk) 05:10, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Denied MER-C 11:22, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

guru.psu.edu/policies/AD85.html

How can the site be useful It is a link to an official Penn State policy, I believe

Why it should not be blacklisted A notice of links on the blacklist was recently added to Rene Portland. The offending link appears to be a link to a Penn State policy. My first thought was that perhaps some organization called "guru" was inappropriately copying material, possibly in violation of copyright, and that was the reason for the inclusion on the blacklist. I decided to search for the policy on the Penn State website.

I found this general page about affirmative-action which clearly appears to be an official page associated with Penn State: Affirmative-action office

That page has a reference to policy AD85, and a link but the link goes to the blacklisted site. I don't know whether it is simply a coincidence that the university chose a site naming scheme which included a word commonly associated with problematic sites or if something else is going on.

If this link does not appear to be exhibiting the problem that led to the blacklist rule, can I asked that he be whitelisted?--S Philbrick(Talk) 18:44, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Sphilbrick: I can link just fine to http://guru.psu.edu/policies/AD85.html -- there was a bug in the regex for the .guru TLD blacklist, which has been fixed. ~Amatulić (talk) 07:34, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Amatulic: Thanks. Am I correct that no further action by me on the affected article is needed? Should I or should I not remove {{Blacklisted-links}}--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:19, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Sphilbrick: yes please remove the tag, because the link isn't actually blacklisted, and wasn't ever intended as a target for the blacklist. ~Amatulić (talk) 02:05, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Done --S Philbrick(Talk) 04:37, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

filmybase.com

How can the site be useful This site is useful for Indian users because this site is an Indian Movies Online Database as IMDb.com. Users visits this site and they votes their favorite movies.

Why it should not be blacklisted The main purpose of the site is to provide a online collection to Indian movies. This site links are only added to Indian movie's Wiki. Users visits this site to give votes and add reviews to their favorite Indian movies. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.229.204.182 (talk • contribs)

Strongly oppose:
  1. The site is useless as a reference because it doesn't have an established reputation for fact-checking or a clear editorial policy, and there's no indication that anyone of merit (i.e. an established team of experienced journalists trained in honest journalistic skills) is operating the site.
  2. The site is also useless as a resource, because WikiProject Film doesn't care about user-contributed film ratings. Note Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film#Audience response. We don't include IMDb ratings or Rotten Tomatoes' user ratings in articles, so if that's all that this site can offer, no dice.
  3. The site is useless for external links, per WP:ELNO as the site provides no significant expansion on information already present in our articles. For instance, if you look at *DOMAIN*/movies/63691-mukhtiar-chadha (an article at Filmybase) and compare it to Mukhtiar Chadha, it'll be clear that Filmybase adds nothing to this project. And for all we know, Filmybase is scraping Wikipedia articles for content like many other spam sites do.
  4. Let's not forget that the person who first added this site to Wikipedia resorted to sockpuppetry to attempt to legitimize the site by recreating articles about it. It's clear the user hasn't learned his lesson, hence this disingenuous removal request. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:34, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
no Declined. Please defer to whitelist if you believe there is a valid use case scenario for this link, which at this time would seem highly unlikely. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 18:54, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

xvideos.com

This website provide lot of information about our life. Every one should aware about this. WOW... What a website. Awesome!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.89.154.131 (talk • contribs)

3g2upl4pq6kufc4m.onion

3g2upl4pq6kufc4m.onion is DuckDuckGo.com's onion address. On the page en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DuckDuckGo we see DuckDuckGo's onion address listed in the sidebar. Onion addresses are urls and should be clickable. I went to edit it to reflect that fact but the address is blocked by an overly strict \b[_\-0-9a-z]+\.onion\b. A comment next to it shows it was initially just meant to block the silkroad (which would be retired now anyway, not that we'd want to link to a dead site. I think in the very least prominent and scrupulous onion links should be allowed.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.62.199.219 (talk • contribs)

@71.62.199.219: After the problems with SilkRoad (mainly editors changing links from the official to other .onion addresses), and seeing similar behaviour with others, the whole set was blacklisted. Specific, properly verified, .onion addresses for those cases where the subject is notable (and the few cases where they are needed as references) can be excluded, but that has to be done through whitelisting. Hence,  Defer to Whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:18, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ticketmaster.com

Hello, I am trying to make some changes to the Ticketmaster page and it will not save because ticketmaster.com triggered a spam filter, I've tried looking why it was blacklisted but could not find anything. Vistadan (talk) 20:14, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Defer to Whitelist is appropriate if you need additional references for Ticketmaster. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:36, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

pro-otdyh.ru

For goodness sake, I am trying to write articles on obscure Russian entities. Blocking my source sites doesn't help. IMO there's some kind of Russophopia in play here, to be honest. This isn't the first time that I've found anodyne and useful Russian sites blocked because someone mildly spammed them during the Carter administration or whatever. OK that's how Russian roll. It's not the end of the world. I need these sites. Right now I require pro-otdyh.ru.

I cannot find any evidence in the archives of why or when this site was blocked, and I don't know if it's local or global, so I'm posting to both places. Thanking you in advance for your cooperation, Labutnum of the Encyclopedia Herostratus (talk) 02:56, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Herostratus: For goodness sake, please stop with the inappropriate accusations if you don't know what is happening. Russophobia .. IMHO there is some dramah in play here. And such comments are not going to help your cause. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:42, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Herostratus: This was on meta (and I saw that you were there already as well) - there  Done. http://tolyatti.pro-otdyh.ru should now work. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:57, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK thanks! Herostratus (talk) 00:32, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

allaboutlaw.co.uk

This is a useful website all the time for law careers information. It is a useful resource, but it was blacklisted in 2009. Clearly they had been spamming, but an indefinite ban seems silly when it is a good resource. I guess after 6 years they might have learnt their lesson. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.139.210.86 (talk • contribs)

Note: Technical fix (uninvolved) - moved misplaced post from wrong section, it's apparently about a requested removal. GermanJoe (talk) 09:40, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Wikipedia doesn't need this, nor your other affiliated site (allaboutcareers.co.uk). Please promote your websites elsewhere. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:51, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

diasporaengager.com

Hello, I just noticed that you placed diasporaengager.com is blacklisted. diasporaengager.com is not a spammer. That website is the first diaspora platform worldwide. We thought people on Wikipedia will find it useful. That is why the link was posted on Wikepedia. Our intent was not to spam anybody. From now on, we will not post any diasporaengager.com links on wikepedia. Please do us a favor by removing diasporaengager.com from your blacklist. diasporaengager.com is a well established company and you can check their reputation on google, etc. Please remove this blacklisting. SOrry for the misunderstanding. Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rayholou (talk • contribs) 14:04, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done You spammed with multiple accounts after being warned, and as a result you landed your website (or your employer's website) on our blacklist. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:48, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

examiner.com

examiner.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

I'm a new editor for Wikipedia and was trying to add a citation for an article about Steve Jobs from one of the most celebrated, well-established newspapers in the U.S. The Examiner. For some reason that I don't really understand examiner.com is blocked on this "spammer blacklist." It really is quite startling to try to add a citation for this important newspaper and find its blocked. It's like if the Atlanta Journal Constitution or the Denver Post or the Seattle Post-Intelligencer or the Chicago Tribune some similar source. If there is some kind of problem with link spamming from examiner.com (and there may be, I'm not up on that question) there needs to be a more finesse way to handle it than simply blocking all citations from this important newspaper. Zaindy٨٧ 26 February 2016

 Defer to Whitelist Examiner has no editorial oversight (and is thus rarely a reliable source, and Examiner.com authors are paid a very competitive rate based on standard Internet variables including page views, unique visitors, session length, and advertising performance. This has been discussed many times in the archives; see here for original blacklisting post. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:50, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

mensusa.com

mensusa.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

Hello I am the new member in the wikipedia and would like to link website information to wikipedia page. But, while linking website link we are getting the message that your website is blacklisted. Please help us on the same so that the website will be remove from the wikipedia blacklist directories.

We hope you will accept my humble request and will remove the website from the wikipedia blacklist directory.

Thank you, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suits1 (talk • contribs)

You will have to explain further why you want to link to this, as it is a purely sales-oriented site and appears to contain no information that would be useful to any Wikipedia article. . . Mean as custard (talk) 11:06, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just providing additional details, but this domain has some history. It was spammed by:
See also the OP's test additions for
The requested URL should not be removed imo. In fact it would be better to blacklist the mentioned additional sites too. All are commercial domains, mensitaly.com has been spammed a year ago by
Suit-usa.blogspot.* is the blog for suitusa.com, another blacklisted spammer domain. GermanJoe (talk) 02:10, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rejected. Bad faith request; submitter blocked and new domains blacklisted. MER-C 02:34, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Want the website removal from Wiki blacklist

I want to request the removal of currencyliquidator.com from the blacklist of wikipedia. I am gonna contribute the currency exchange rates from this website on the Iranian rial page. This website will provide the latest exchange rate which even the other website listed in the template on this page would never been able to provide. I have gone through website exchange rates and they are latest one. So kindly, remove currencyliquidator from the blacklist. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LettyAbs (talk • contribs) 16:38, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this editor has been blocked as a sockpuppet. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Peterwoodwilson. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:59, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Rejected. Bad faith request. MER-C 11:16, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

nomadjour.com

How can the site be useful Original content on the topic of travelling. It provides useful information and guides about travelling.

Why it should not be blacklisted It is blacklisted under porn websites, but it has nothing about porn.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Coce0001 (talk • contribs)

 Not done, nothing to do. http://nomadjour.com isn't blacklisted. ~Amatulić (talk) 06:27, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Coce0001: The only additions of this site were on zh.wikipedia, and there it is blacklisted. Here it is indeed not blacklisted. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:41, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

cbronline.com

How can the site be useful Looks like a legitimate news source. Stumbled upon it while searching for sources to document the switch of a satellite launch from SpaceX to Arianespace. (Bhavana Navuluri (2016-02-10). "ViaSat, Boeing launch first ever Terabit Satellite platform for global broadband". Computer Business Review. Retrieved 2016-02-13. ViaSat has launched the ViaSat-3 ultra-high capacity satellite platform to provide high-speed and high-quality internet and video streaming globally. […] The first satellite, serving the Americas, is scheduled to be launched by late 2019 or early 2020. […] One ViaSat-3 class satellite will launch on SpaceX's Falcon Heavy.) (changed the URL in the reference so I can save it and you can read it...) Meanwhile I found an alternate source for my needs but perhaps a review of this blacklist entry is warranted.

Why it should not be blacklisted Found legitimate and well-written news that could be used as source in Wikipedia citations. Was really surprised to get a rejection due to blacklisting of the whole news site, which may be an overreach due to past abuse. I have no time to dig into history of this particular site, just reporting an annoyance to normal editor work). — JFG talk 16:47, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You couldn't be bothered to check the history, so you just want to say you're annoyed? And you found an alternative source anyway? What was the point of this request then? If you cannot find an alternative source,  Defer to Whitelist, that's what it's for. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:10, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


cex.io

How can the site be useful This is the official website of CEX.IO LTD company, registered in London, UK. The website has been blacklisted during the period when CEX.IO Bitcoin exchange wiki page was under submission. The article was not compliant with Wikipedia requirements, but now the page has been approved, you can see it here: CEX.IO Bitcoin exchange.

Why it should not be blacklisted As said, this is a link to the official website of the company that has a Wikipedia article. It will be used only once in the article, in the company summary, without placing it anywhere else in the text.— Preceding unsigned comment added by LunaCydonia (talk • contribs)

rutheckerdhall.com

Discovered this while editing Ruth Eckerd Hall. The log doesn't give a reason for the block. Trivialist (talk) 02:04, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Trivialist: The reason is Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/The_Fresh_Beat_Band, I guess this is one of the links that was used in the process. I'll remove, quite long ago, assuming this is collateral damage from that attack. Can always be re-added when abused again. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
minus Removed from MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:10, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Troubleshooting and problems

Googleweblight.com

googleweblight.com is triggering the filter. NE Ent 13:04, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@NE Ent: I see it does, and don't understand yet why (it is not on en.wikipedia). I'll have a look on meta. Anyway, I don't think there is ever a need to link to the site on Wikipedia (I actually wonder whether it can be used as a redirect service), I think you wanted to link to http://nativepakistan.com/rare-newspapers-and-magazines-about-pakistan/. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:49, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is on meta, added by Billinghurst. Rationale is indeed that googleweblight.com can be used to avoid checks, see m:User:COIBot/XWiki/googleweblight.com. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:51, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What I wanted to do was create Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive275 (archive bot(s) haven't been working on AN) and got held up because some else had previously used it (making me think it was a recent addition). Anything, it's google, and appears to be used to support low bandwidth mobile connections [68], so perhaps its inclusion should be reconsidered. NE Ent 17:57, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ah .. an archiving problem. Yes, indeed, the link is for making pages lighter for mobile purposes or low speed connections. If that is needed for Wikipedia, then our devs should make our own version of that hook, I don't think that we should use an external service for it.
That it is google does not matter - what matters is that people can abuse a link service for promotional purposes, or to obfuscate links that are blacklisted. And there is no need for this, the original link works perfectly well. Parts of google are rightfully blacklisted as they can be, and have been, abused for blacklist evasion and for search engine optimisation spamming. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:46, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note that I don't think that this specific case of linking was a problem, many of these links are used in good faith. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:48, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Partial matches: <change.org> blocks <time-to-change.org.uk>

As discussed here, the regex on <change.org> here on en.Wikipedia blocks the unrelated <time-to-change.org.uk>. Would it be possible to change the regex on <change.org>, but also on all other sites, to reflect actual url specifications, rather than the current approximation, as I won't be the only one to be affected! Cheers. ‑‑YodinT 11:42, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Consider  Done. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:11, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
http://time-to-change.org.uk should now work. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:16, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks :) ‑‑YodinT 12:29, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Partial matches: <cardiff.co.uk> to <www.whitchurchmethodistchurch-cardiff.co.uk>

I tried to add a citation of www.whitchurchmethodistchurch-cardiff.co.uk/Belle-View-Methodist-URC-Church-Llandaff-North.php, but got an error that says "The following link has triggered a protection filter: cardiff.co.uk". This looks spurious, and is presumably similar to MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#Partial matches: <change.org> blocks <time-to-change.org.uk> (above). Can this be fixed? Verbcatcher (talk) 01:25, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Verbcatcher: Yes, this can be fixed, but probably best through a whitelist entry for the specific link.  Defer to Whitelist --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:04, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/March_2016"