This section is for archiving Additions. |
There have also been numerous other IPs, but I have listed only those that have been used recently.
The problem has mainly been spammings of the article Limoges Box, ranging from May 2011 to November 2012. There has been edit warring between two different spammers, removing one another's spam and adding their own, with Miraluck and 97.96.242.159 on one side and 71.105.235.16 and 96.229.138.69 on the other.
Examples from Miraluck and 97.96.242.159:
Examples from the other side (71.105.235.16 and 96.229.138.69):
There have also been spammings to several other articles, going back at least as far as July 2008, as in
this edit, where Miraluck adds links to www.limogesboutique.com, www.limogesdirect.net and www.perfectlimoges.com to
Limoges porcelain,
this edit where the same editor adds the same links to
Kaolinite, and
this edit where 72.184.14.93 adds a link to www.limogesboutique.com to
Porcelain,
this edit where the same IP adds the same link to
Limoges porcelain. Particularly striking is
this edit, where 86.147.252.72 adds a spam link to www.limoges.com with the totally misleading edit summary "deleted link spam". (The edit only adds a link, and does not delete anything.) Links to the same site are added
here
here
here and numerous other times over the years.
JamesBWatson (
talk)
11:07, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
MER-C 08:48, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Mostly refspam. Almost never uses the same IP twice, but they all geolocate to France. - MrOllie ( talk) 20:01, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
inforapid.org: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
It's a wikipedia mirror.
-- seth ( talk) 09:19, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
These two domains belong to the same company. The SPA Serumy has done nothing but adding links to these two domains, since the account started editing in July 2012. (Examples: [17] [18] [19] [20]) Not only do the links add little if any useful value to the article, but it seems that the web site in question (under both its domain names) copies content from other sites and falsely claims to have copyright. This is discussed at Wikipedia:External links/Noticeboard#Alpha History. (Permalink to current version: [21]). JamesBWatson ( talk) 11:12, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
asdste100.org: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
asd-stemg.org: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
Hi. Hu12 helped last time, in the thread archived at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 59#Simplified English.
The spammers are back with two new domains (listed above. Diffs of the sites being added, are here: [22], [23]). Please blacklist those 2 new domains. Thanks.
(Further background details, fyi: As Tobias notes at RFPP, they sometimes temporarily redirect the domains to the official/actual industry site (eg that first one, currently), to make the url appear legit, but then later redirect them back to their own business. (Also the spammers are trying to delete talkpage threads - see December history at Talk:Simplified Technical English - which we can revert for now, and we'll request temp page protection if it continues. I'm just noting for completism).) – Quiddity ( talk) 23:10, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
nakki.info: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com 62.194.104.217 ( talk) 19:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
This section is for archiving Removals. |
I noticed this domain was registered on Wikipedia's blacklist: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Spam_blacklist. I spoke with the company and they mentioned it had only submitted to Wikipedia once three years ago and that is its only experience with it. Is there a way to figure out why it was blacklisted or what steps I can take to remove it?
Sherrymelrose ( talk) 13:53, 19 December 2012 (UTC)Sherrymelrose
This is plain weird, but for some reason the official music page of Shakespears Sister on Facebook is blacklisted specifically. There is nothing vulgar or pornographic on the page, it's simply an artist page with important news and announcements, that is essential to use as a source.-- Meluvseveryone ( talk) 18:49, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
indianetzone.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
This links to an encyclopedia site. I got useful information on the Bikaner Camel Corps from here: indianetzone.com/64/bikaner_camel_corps.htm. Yes, the site design is terrible, but that doesn't make it spam (nor does the fact that an IP inappropriately added links from the same company, not the same domain). I got the following information from the site [these are my notes]:
Prof. Squirrel ( talk) 18:17, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
ncww2mt.freewebspace.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
Appears to have got trapped by other wider blocks on freewebs sites. Tying to fill in ref detail on Closed cinemas in Kingston upon Hull Keith D ( talk) 18:39, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
nextiva.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
Would just to know why the website was blocked? And if it is possible to unblock it. I am currently creating an article of the said company, and I am adding references linked to that site. Thanks! -- Renzoy16 | Contact Me 09:44, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
mymovingreviews.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 was trying to add a page as a source regarding moving companies lawsuits. The site is a user-generated reviews site for moving companies and they also write about the industry/cover industry news in the news section. I see that some companies have abused Wikipedia by adding links to the website to their company profiles, but the website is a reputation in the moving industry and is mentioned all over the news (cnet, reuters, pcword, etc.). They also have some interesting interviews of authorities and news coverages in the niche that can also be of value to Wikipedia, especially around the new moving scam reports released by the Department of Transportation and senate.gov. I also don't think that many companies will abuse by adding links to the site as there are only a few moving companies (the largest ones) listed in Wikipedia. I think it will be of benefit is it is removed from the blacklist. Thanks!— Preceding unsigned comment added by MarieContrado ( talk • contribs) 15:07, 13 December 2012
Dear Hu12, thanks for the quick reply. I was particularly referring to the non user-generated part of the site.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.19.44.173 ( talk • contribs) 13:15, 14 December 2012
Hi Hu12, I think you've misunderstood me. Here are some examples of non user-generated types of content I mentioned earlier: /move/exclusive-interview-amsa (interview) /move/moving-industry-snapshot-2012 (stats) /move/lawsuit-against-moving-companies (article) /move/cutting-expenses-with-reviews (research) Since the site is still in the blacklist, I can't paste the full path. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.19.44.173 ( talk) 14:13, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
I have tried to save the citation and this url Bulanda, Susan (August 18, 2010). [examiner.com/article/important-research-for-leonberger-dogs-inherited-polyneuropathy-ipn "Important research for Leonberger dogs, inherited polyneuropathy (IPN)"]. Retrieved December 17, 2012. {{
cite web}}
: Check |url=
value (
help) which apparently is on the black list. I eliminated the "
http://www" from the link, so that I can save this, and show you where I found it. I request that this link be permitted. I was sent to you by the help desk. Thank you.
7&6=thirteen (
☎)
01:50, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
virtualmedicalcentre.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
Me again. Specifically, virtualmedicalcentre.com/anatomy/sweating-perspiration/75 . The article has a lot of good information, especially on eccrine v. apocrine v. apoeccrine glands. The site is verified by Health On the Net Foundation ( verification here) and it's not on Quackwatch. — Prof. Squirrel ( talk) 05:47, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
moneyweek.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
MoneyWeek is a reputable UK finance publication, which has its own Wikipedia article - MoneyWeek. -- Astellix ( talk) 06:14, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
The article I wish to link is: examiner.com/article/hoekstra-reconsiders-decides-to-challenge-stabenow
I read the Common Requests and it looks like the issues regarding examiner.com are more closely related to editorial policy then outright spam.
This particular article is non-controversial in content and is being used as a replacement for a dead link that was available in a better known publication: [27]. The Detroit News routinely removes articles after a short period of time. The content is reliable, but the examiner has preserved it's content longer.
It should be made available for the article, United States Senate election in Michigan, 2012. Currently, the citation is referenced in a non-linked form.-- Libertyguy ( talk) 05:10, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
This section is for archiving Troubleshooting and problems. |
This section is for archiving Discussions. |
Just a quick question, is there a log of edits that trigger the spam blacklist, analogous to the edit filter log? Deli nk ( talk) 21:00, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
It would be useful to blacklist links to some sites from articles only, such as those that provide potentially useful information but don't meet the requirements for reliable sources. Is this possible? If not has this been requested? Peter James ( talk) 23:39, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
At the end of the page there's a link to return to the editing page, but the edit is lost. Until bugzilla:23193 (or comment 2 of bugzilla:9416) is fixed, could this be replaced with a message saying to use the back button? Peter James ( talk) 23:39, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
This section is for archiving Additions. |
There have also been numerous other IPs, but I have listed only those that have been used recently.
The problem has mainly been spammings of the article Limoges Box, ranging from May 2011 to November 2012. There has been edit warring between two different spammers, removing one another's spam and adding their own, with Miraluck and 97.96.242.159 on one side and 71.105.235.16 and 96.229.138.69 on the other.
Examples from Miraluck and 97.96.242.159:
Examples from the other side (71.105.235.16 and 96.229.138.69):
There have also been spammings to several other articles, going back at least as far as July 2008, as in
this edit, where Miraluck adds links to www.limogesboutique.com, www.limogesdirect.net and www.perfectlimoges.com to
Limoges porcelain,
this edit where the same editor adds the same links to
Kaolinite, and
this edit where 72.184.14.93 adds a link to www.limogesboutique.com to
Porcelain,
this edit where the same IP adds the same link to
Limoges porcelain. Particularly striking is
this edit, where 86.147.252.72 adds a spam link to www.limoges.com with the totally misleading edit summary "deleted link spam". (The edit only adds a link, and does not delete anything.) Links to the same site are added
here
here
here and numerous other times over the years.
JamesBWatson (
talk)
11:07, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
MER-C 08:48, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Mostly refspam. Almost never uses the same IP twice, but they all geolocate to France. - MrOllie ( talk) 20:01, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
inforapid.org: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
It's a wikipedia mirror.
-- seth ( talk) 09:19, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
These two domains belong to the same company. The SPA Serumy has done nothing but adding links to these two domains, since the account started editing in July 2012. (Examples: [17] [18] [19] [20]) Not only do the links add little if any useful value to the article, but it seems that the web site in question (under both its domain names) copies content from other sites and falsely claims to have copyright. This is discussed at Wikipedia:External links/Noticeboard#Alpha History. (Permalink to current version: [21]). JamesBWatson ( talk) 11:12, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
asdste100.org: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
asd-stemg.org: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
Hi. Hu12 helped last time, in the thread archived at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 59#Simplified English.
The spammers are back with two new domains (listed above. Diffs of the sites being added, are here: [22], [23]). Please blacklist those 2 new domains. Thanks.
(Further background details, fyi: As Tobias notes at RFPP, they sometimes temporarily redirect the domains to the official/actual industry site (eg that first one, currently), to make the url appear legit, but then later redirect them back to their own business. (Also the spammers are trying to delete talkpage threads - see December history at Talk:Simplified Technical English - which we can revert for now, and we'll request temp page protection if it continues. I'm just noting for completism).) – Quiddity ( talk) 23:10, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
nakki.info: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com 62.194.104.217 ( talk) 19:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
This section is for archiving Removals. |
I noticed this domain was registered on Wikipedia's blacklist: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Spam_blacklist. I spoke with the company and they mentioned it had only submitted to Wikipedia once three years ago and that is its only experience with it. Is there a way to figure out why it was blacklisted or what steps I can take to remove it?
Sherrymelrose ( talk) 13:53, 19 December 2012 (UTC)Sherrymelrose
This is plain weird, but for some reason the official music page of Shakespears Sister on Facebook is blacklisted specifically. There is nothing vulgar or pornographic on the page, it's simply an artist page with important news and announcements, that is essential to use as a source.-- Meluvseveryone ( talk) 18:49, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
indianetzone.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
This links to an encyclopedia site. I got useful information on the Bikaner Camel Corps from here: indianetzone.com/64/bikaner_camel_corps.htm. Yes, the site design is terrible, but that doesn't make it spam (nor does the fact that an IP inappropriately added links from the same company, not the same domain). I got the following information from the site [these are my notes]:
Prof. Squirrel ( talk) 18:17, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
ncww2mt.freewebspace.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
Appears to have got trapped by other wider blocks on freewebs sites. Tying to fill in ref detail on Closed cinemas in Kingston upon Hull Keith D ( talk) 18:39, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
nextiva.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
Would just to know why the website was blocked? And if it is possible to unblock it. I am currently creating an article of the said company, and I am adding references linked to that site. Thanks! -- Renzoy16 | Contact Me 09:44, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
mymovingreviews.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 was trying to add a page as a source regarding moving companies lawsuits. The site is a user-generated reviews site for moving companies and they also write about the industry/cover industry news in the news section. I see that some companies have abused Wikipedia by adding links to the website to their company profiles, but the website is a reputation in the moving industry and is mentioned all over the news (cnet, reuters, pcword, etc.). They also have some interesting interviews of authorities and news coverages in the niche that can also be of value to Wikipedia, especially around the new moving scam reports released by the Department of Transportation and senate.gov. I also don't think that many companies will abuse by adding links to the site as there are only a few moving companies (the largest ones) listed in Wikipedia. I think it will be of benefit is it is removed from the blacklist. Thanks!— Preceding unsigned comment added by MarieContrado ( talk • contribs) 15:07, 13 December 2012
Dear Hu12, thanks for the quick reply. I was particularly referring to the non user-generated part of the site.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.19.44.173 ( talk • contribs) 13:15, 14 December 2012
Hi Hu12, I think you've misunderstood me. Here are some examples of non user-generated types of content I mentioned earlier: /move/exclusive-interview-amsa (interview) /move/moving-industry-snapshot-2012 (stats) /move/lawsuit-against-moving-companies (article) /move/cutting-expenses-with-reviews (research) Since the site is still in the blacklist, I can't paste the full path. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.19.44.173 ( talk) 14:13, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
I have tried to save the citation and this url Bulanda, Susan (August 18, 2010). [examiner.com/article/important-research-for-leonberger-dogs-inherited-polyneuropathy-ipn "Important research for Leonberger dogs, inherited polyneuropathy (IPN)"]. Retrieved December 17, 2012. {{
cite web}}
: Check |url=
value (
help) which apparently is on the black list. I eliminated the "
http://www" from the link, so that I can save this, and show you where I found it. I request that this link be permitted. I was sent to you by the help desk. Thank you.
7&6=thirteen (
☎)
01:50, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
virtualmedicalcentre.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
Me again. Specifically, virtualmedicalcentre.com/anatomy/sweating-perspiration/75 . The article has a lot of good information, especially on eccrine v. apocrine v. apoeccrine glands. The site is verified by Health On the Net Foundation ( verification here) and it's not on Quackwatch. — Prof. Squirrel ( talk) 05:47, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
moneyweek.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
MoneyWeek is a reputable UK finance publication, which has its own Wikipedia article - MoneyWeek. -- Astellix ( talk) 06:14, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
The article I wish to link is: examiner.com/article/hoekstra-reconsiders-decides-to-challenge-stabenow
I read the Common Requests and it looks like the issues regarding examiner.com are more closely related to editorial policy then outright spam.
This particular article is non-controversial in content and is being used as a replacement for a dead link that was available in a better known publication: [27]. The Detroit News routinely removes articles after a short period of time. The content is reliable, but the examiner has preserved it's content longer.
It should be made available for the article, United States Senate election in Michigan, 2012. Currently, the citation is referenced in a non-linked form.-- Libertyguy ( talk) 05:10, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
This section is for archiving Troubleshooting and problems. |
This section is for archiving Discussions. |
Just a quick question, is there a log of edits that trigger the spam blacklist, analogous to the edit filter log? Deli nk ( talk) 21:00, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
It would be useful to blacklist links to some sites from articles only, such as those that provide potentially useful information but don't meet the requirements for reliable sources. Is this possible? If not has this been requested? Peter James ( talk) 23:39, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
At the end of the page there's a link to return to the editing page, but the edit is lost. Until bugzilla:23193 (or comment 2 of bugzilla:9416) is fixed, could this be replaced with a message saying to use the back button? Peter James ( talk) 23:39, 7 December 2012 (UTC)