122.169.124.122 ( 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) Continually being added to every site under the sun.-- otherlleft ( talk) 11:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
wiki.d-addicts.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
Links to this unnnotable wiki have begun getting more and more prevalent, as both inappropriate "sources" and as external links across various Japanese actor articles. They are beeing added by IPs and registered users, so I don't think an IP block can help. Recent removals include three links removed from Yūya Yagira, 4 instances from Joo Jong-hyuk, 2 instances from Risa Kudō. There are now hundreds, if not thousands, of links to this wiki. This is no Memory Alpha. It is not an established wiki for using in ELs, and certainly not a valid source. I feel a blacklist is necessary to address this issue and stop this flood of spam. Additionally, the main site "d-addicts.com" actively promotes the downloading of illegal copyrighted versions of licensed series, which is a violation of WP:COPYRIGHT. It also has a secondary wiki on fansubs. Not sure if its better to just block d-addicts.com all together or just this problematic one. -- Collectonian ( talk · contribs) 10:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
mymetrostop.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
Persistent spamming on Washington Metro related articles from various IP addresses. Site is a business directory arranged by Metro station. Most recent diff here. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 05:53, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
82.42.175.146 ( 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)
IP user has been adding Spam links to the above address, onto various user talkpages - I propose that this link get's blacklisted I had proposed it on Meta but was redirect here. Dark Mage 09:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
These three four links have been repeatedly added by the same group of IPs and user to multiple articles:
Deli nk ( talk) 22:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Google Adsense IDs: 7505437796731158, 0540338099227977
MalSurf
-- A. B. ( talk • contribs) 20:34, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
There is no obvious encyclopaedic reason why we would ever want to link to a petition. There are a thousand and one reasons why POV-pushers would want to do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.176.82.42 ( talk) 21:47, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Caught red-handed for the fourth time today. See WikiProject Spam report. MER-C 10:04, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
trainpetdog.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 domain has been repeatedly added to dog-related articles. I removed it from 25 en.wikipedia articles yesterday and from pt.wikipedia and no.wikipedia today. After reading this link and this link I can only conclude that this is a criminal scam run from India and it should be blacklisted immediately. The pattern of adding the spam is interesting, a different IP address is used each time, but always from the same Indian-registered ISP. Below are a few of the IP addresses used, but this list is by no means exhaustive:
—Preceding unsigned comment added by TimTay ( talk • contribs)
Is a great site and doesn't count as spam but (and especially) freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com is user-written thus doesn't meet WP:RELIABILITY. There are 7134 hits for "rootsweb" in en and most of those seem to be refs. Saintrain ( talk) 01:05, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Do not attempt to visit the following site without first reading the comment below!
This is a malicious link which leads to a porn site with a malicious script which makes it very difficult to leave or close the page without force quitting the browser. It has only been added twice that I am aware of, here and here (in both cases a reference was removed and replaced by the link), but because of the nature of the link, and because Googling the url shows that it has been spammed all over the Internets today and yesterday it seems like a good idea to blacklist it now. -- Bonadea ( talk) 08:32, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
freewebs.com/savenyc: 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
These are just some of the link additions that I saw, and there may be more. Whatever the merit of the "Save the World Trade Center" idea this site puts forth, the site repeatedly gets re-added to various Wikipedia pages including Skyscraper, Empire State Building, Brooklyn, and others. The IP changes from time to time, so I think the blacklist is the better way to deal with this. -- Aude ( talk) 00:04, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Massive coordinated citation spam. See WikiProject Spam report. MER-C 12:57, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
See WikiProject Spam report. MER-C 13:22, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
swamilive.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
[20] and [21] by JeremyJamesJohnson ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)
[22] by Atribuncle ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)
[23] by Crustacean Consumed ( 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) (a wordplay on the username of the user who had reverted the previous instance)
[24] and [25] by Stan Harrison ( 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)
And that's just the last few hours. -- Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 03:36, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
zuguide.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 link has recently started to be added by a few newly registered users to the articles of various actors. The site contains trailers from films. Although the new users and the site itself contend that the trailers are licensed, copyright questions still remain. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 22:33, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
This guy has been POV pushing through spam to self published pieces for a long time. I asked for and received blacklisting on a bunch of blogspot articles and ezine.com last year on Meta [26].
Turns out he's been back with his own domain since March of this year. Sites added to multiple articles by multiple IPs over a fairly long period of time so blocks and protection aren't going to work.
See further documentation of recent actions at User:SiobhanHansa/Checks#Articles_by_David_Ben-Ariel.
Thanks. -- SiobhanHansa 15:14, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
-- A. B. ( talk • contribs) 15:25, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Large amount of links on lots of articles, added rapidly. Could be script based, maybe. - MrOllie ( talk) 20:45, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
88.249.98.46 ( 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)
I have removed the advertisement many times. IP blocked twice, but it is back again. Site has no useful content. -- þħɥʂıɕıʄʈʝɘɖı 17:54, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
-- A. B. ( talk • contribs) 02:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
528hazelwood.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
Some pretty random personal blog, but a static (update: not sure if it is static, as it is assigned by an ISP, but it doesn't seem to have been assigned to anyone except the person behind 528hazelwood
Protonk (
talk) 18:49, 31 October 2008 (UTC)) IP
keeps inserting this exact
diff each time. If they did it more frequently I'd just block the IP, but this works too.
Protonk (
talk)
15:07, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
www.greatdogsite.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
Added by a number of IPs to a bunch of dog breed articles with misleading edit summaries ("fixed citation", "broken link", etc). Exactly one link added per IP in the 72.184.0.0/16 range, which makes me incredibly suspicious. Even more suspicious is that all the articles they've been added to, so far, start with 'A'... Zetawoof( ζ) 04:55, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
asyncop.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
Per
this please add \basyncop\.com\b
- it should have been added here instead of the global blacklist. Once added here, it will be removed at Meta. —
Mike.
lifeguard |
@en.wb
23:30, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
All IPs have been warned and the 65.118.76.139 IP has been blocked once but the link continues to be re-added. -- SiobhanHansa 14:49, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
injusticeusa.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
jewcon.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
These appear to be anti-semitic hate sites masquerading as a "judicial misconduct" sites.
Spammed to Proskauer Rose in place of its normal homepage ( see this diff) by
User 75.4.248.245 spammed this link to the Proskauer Rose article here. I will be requesting protection for this page. -- Eastlaw ( talk) 22:01, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
IP has been blocked for excessive linkspamming. See initial report at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#markets.com. --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 20:12, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
4dasoul.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
See WikiProject Spam report/{{WPSPAM|247141715#http://spam.4dasoul.com}}. MER-C 10:49, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
This commercial site has been added to multiple HIV/AIDS-related articles by the single-purpose account (and now banned) User:Plwha and sockpuppets, including
Sufficient warnings have been made, but the editor appears to IP-hop to avoid the possibility of blocks. The webpage itself contains a small amount of partly inaccurate travel advice for HIV-positive travelers and nothing of relevance for any of the articles to which it is repeatedly added.
By User Plwha: [33], [34], [35], [36].
By 86.121.195.144 on 10 November: [37], [38], [39], [40], [41], [42], [43], [44]
An edit by 86.121.193.176 replaces a relevant and functional Wikilink.
Examples from IP 86.121.193.29 include: [45]
This by 86.121.193.7 replaces multiple bona fide links with the plwha webpage. Keepcalmandcarryon ( talk) 17:43, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
An anon user has been using multiple sites to forward those who click on the links to a site using a referal tag, and edit warring to add these links.
None of the listed sites are used for legitimate links. --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 18:09, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
hosuronline.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
An anonymous user has been restoring this link on Mehndi for quite a long time now, from lots of IPs. Warnings and explanations haven't made a dent, and last time the article was semi protected he just waited it out, so now I think we need to take this step. Partial lists of IPs below.
Thanks for your attention. - MrOllie ( talk) 13:40, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
I am requesting that this be removed. This is required to add a verifiable 3rd party reference to an article (which I would mention, but I can't because the spam filter even blocks on this page). It's not clear why this is on the list in the first place, as it seems to be a straightforward news site. Mdwh ( talk) 01:38, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I have been contributing to the Green Tea Page since its inception - recently I moved one of my citations that had existed for years on the Green Tea page from the second instance of the discussion of Green Tea history in China to the first instance (the grammatically the more correct thing to do). The reaction from Ohnoitsjamie (an editor I've had issues with before showing a particular bias) was to remove 1) ALL my references immediately, 2) ban my IP for protesting, 3)indicate he would not discuss the issue further (despite Wikipedia's rules on trying to arbitrate the issue) 3) blacklist my site when I tried to get around his jihad against it because of his insistance not to discuss the issue further. Efforts I made to reinstate the reference were because of his insistence not to discuss the issue futher and my inability to get anyone else to respond to my concerns -- however, they only seemed to give him more justification to define my site as "rogue" to get around his unfair bannings and citation removal in the first place. If ohnoitsjamie had in issue with my moving my original citation the appropriate thing to do would have been to move it back. Instead my contention i he displayed a particular bias and heavyhandedness towards my citation versus others on the same page by removing (rather than moving back) *ALL* citations because I questioned his authority and pointed out his bias. Please see the greentealovers.com discussion and his responses at the bottom of the ohnoitsjamie talk page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ohnoitsjamie. I feel he is unfairly targetting my site. My simple request is that the greentealovers.com site be unbanned from the local blacklist and references I had on the green tea page prior to October 07, 2008 be reinstated. If he wishes to keep the citation in the same place (at the point that Chinese History referenced the second time in the page), although its grammatically incorrect, I am willing to compromise on that. What is the wikipedia policy for editors who demonstrate this type of bias and treat some contributors differently than others??? I've never had such an issue like that with any wikipedia editor before in all my years of contributions. Any issues have always been reasonably resolved in a mutually collaborative way.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpeizer ( talk • contribs) 17:12, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
I am formally requesting a third unbiased party and not Ohnoitsjamie review this as I do not consider Ohnoitsjamie an objective party. He is the only editor I have ever had an issue with is all my years as a wikipedia contributor. The reference in question had been there for years and its clear other references on that page also sell tea. Please review my site (216.131.68.51/greenteahealth.htm) it is rich in green tea medical, preparation, and history information and as such has been a contributor for wikipedia for years. The appropriate thing for you to have done if you had an issue was to simply replace the citation in its original position. Instead Ohnoitsjamie chose to remove ONLY my references (all of them) while seemingly ignoring the other sites which also sold tea on the page. Any sockpuppets etc. were the result of your unfair bias towards my account, and designed to circumvent your banning it while as at the same time indicating your unwillingness to discuss the issue further in violation of wikipedia arbitration rules. You're only now commenting it seems because eI have put in a formal request to unban. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpeizer ( talk • contribs) 17:42, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Again I request an unbiased third party editor and not Ohnoitsjamie (the editor that is at the source of my concern) review this issue. Ohnoitsjamie is correct in that I have contributed to the green and white tea pages over years and have cited greentealovers.com, the site providing those contributions. I also concur with his sockpuppet inference. Having been blocked inappropriately and told the issue would not be discussed further I did take the issue into my own hands when there was no feedback to address my concerns with this editor. There are few other options when he can cut off conversation and ban and blacklist at will. Ohnoitsjamie seemingly has an issue only with greentealovers.com because I question some of his judgements. I think he is biased because he deals differently with my information site, which also happens to sell teas demonstrating health benefits while having no issue with vendors like Stash Tea and blogs with tea advertising wrapped around their information also being listed on the same wikipedia GREEN TEA page. Although this request is to unblock greentealovers I seriously question *HOW* he dealt with my recent citation edit -- by removing all citations and also indicating he would not discuss the issue further. Any blocking and subsequent banning stems from the original bias I am questioning. Please note editor Ohnoitsjamie is still making no attempt to discuss the issue directly with me to come to a compromise as I have offered. Rather he prefers to continue to justify his bias. Jpeizer ( talk • contribs)
That is PRECISELY why I am requesting a third part review of my information site (216.131.68.51/greenteahealth.htm) and of this issue. Ohnoitsjamie continues on a witchhunt for the greentealovers.com information site that has been contributing to the GREEN TEA pages for years with citations while completely ignoring the blatant citations of major commercial tea companies on the green tea page. Ohnoitsjamie seemingly ignores the comments I just noted another editor made to my original complaint related to just that issue filed a complaint about it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpeizer ( talk • contribs) 18:56, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Aude - first, thanks for looking at this as an objective third party. I have put in this formal request to have greentealovers.com unblocked. In my defense I'd like you to note the followingL My site cites reputable peer reviewed journals for ALL its aggregated health information. Please see: 216.131.68.51/greenteahealthcancer.htm. Similarly it gets its processing and preparation information directly from the largest producer of green tea in Japan which it also cites appropriately on the bottom of every page (Some images and information are courtesy of ITO EN, Inc.). The question I have is why was my contributions and citations were good enough for Wikipedia for years especially in its early days when it need non-tech information, but now it isn't. Why was my reference to Tea History in China removed now (after YEARS) by OhnoitsJamie simply because it was moved -- not added. Most importantly, why did editor Ohnoitsjamie, after repeatedly being referred to the bias even by two other editors -- not act upon it? I seriously have to question the actions he took in this case and wonder if others have been also treated in an unbalanced way. This bias alone warrants unblocking consideration. I notice on his info page he talks about the numnber of times his pages have been hacked/abused. I have to wonder if it has something to do with the unbalanced way this editor treats contributors? Also in light of your green tea page edits are references citations [3] and [8] really still appropraite by the standards you are using to qualify these references? comment added by Jpeizer ( talk • contribs) 18:56, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm no longer requesting that the greentealovers reference be cited on the green tea page because the objective editors (Other than OhnoitsJamie) dealt with it in a balanced and fair way by deleting other references of similar context on the green tea page. I contend the argument to maintain the citation was previously valid when similar citations existed there from Tea vendors and OhNoitsJamie did nothing to remove them despite another editor stating a case for equity as well.
1) refusing to deal unbiasedly with the other listings like Stash and Celestial tea on the same page. 2) refused to discuss the matter further in violation of Wiki rules on trying to come to a reasonable compromise.
There is a cause and effect here: Since the original blocking of greentealovers.com was done in a biased manner -- it should be unblocked. Its enough the citation was removed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.123.34.178 ( talk) 19:26, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
It's unfortunate and disheartening to see this self-moralizing about "self-interests" and "unethical behavior" in this discussion about a particular citation. The facts are that the Greentealovers site was a welcome and valid contributor to the wikipedia green tea page for years until Wikipedia decided to "upgrade" its citation policies -- after it had acheived enough credibility to diss the contributors that allowed it to break out of the perception by many that it was more a site for the technology-minded. Still greentealovers.com had as much validity to provide references to the green tea page as celestial seasoning, Stash Tea and other blog/advertisement references that existed on it -- and that was my argument -- PARITY AND BALANCE --until they were removed. Editors showing bias to one set of citations and not the other was hardly fair and balanced. It's unfortunate that the issue with greentealovers has spilled over into the editors deciding to also censor my addition of valid nonprofit technology references like capaciteria.org or my book about the Dynamics or Technology for Social Change. Capaciteria.org for example is a totally free nonprofit capacity resource index that I maintain for the benefit of the sector. These references were added to WIKIPEDIA over years along with other information on the topic of nonprofit technology and never challanged by wikipedia until the editors wished to make a point about this separate issue on greentealovers.com. If you'd like to throw the baby out with the bathwater and eliminate these other resources contributed to wikipedia in the past, thats fine. But please do keep the editorial self-moralizing about out of the discussion when valid contributions become invalid and unethical depending upon the year and editor deciding upon them. What disturbs me is the hypocracy.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.123.34.178 ( talk)
Hello, I am proposing the removal of mysmp from the spam blacklist. This website is a free financial encyclopedia offering traders and finance professionals to develop their trading and financial markets acumen. There are very few websites that have the detailed insight that is presented on mysmp.com. We were originally blacklisted for link spamming. I honestly did not intend to "spam" wikipedia with the content on mysmp and am truly sorry if I had offended anyone in any way. I truly believed that it added value to the community and the owners of each subject actually agreed with me by leaving it on their wiki. mysmp has quite an abundance of great content that we would love to share with the wiki community. Please let me know if I can provide any further information and I would be happy to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.236.89 ( talk • contribs)
Why is this blacklisted, seems legit to me? I have no Idiaho how to apply to get my link removed from blacklist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tasselnfringe ( talk • contribs) 16:31, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I had no problem adding this link last week to the wiki page for Intelius. I added the link to cite my sources stating that this company has been signing up customers to an unauthorized service called 24Protect Plus. My entry was removed and the link was blacklisted. I found numerous other websites that allege the same activity from this company. Complaintsboard.com is a forum where customers can voice their complaints. I have also found several articles that address the integrity issues with this company's business practices. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LuisM111 ( talk • contribs) 22:55, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
I am requesting that the domain sermonaudio.com be considered for removal from the local black list. I tried to update the entry about Giuseppi Logan with a reference to the page (blacklisted domain/sermoninfo.asp?SID=10180811720)that houses a recent interview that proves what is said about him being found by a mission group in New York. The article currently states that it is not know if he is alive. This is a good reference to prove that he is. Evidently someone in the past has abused the use of this site as a resource but I believe this is a valid use. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.155.163.233 ( talk) 17:17, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Is that final? Is there a way for a blacklisted domain to be used in case like this. The article says that the guy may be dead! This is proof that he is not. 72.155.163.233 ( talk) 13:12, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Declined as stale. MaxSem( Han shot first!) 10:23, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
I propose to remove this website from the black list as it is a highly educative and informative resource on the aluminium production. It was added only to articles which can profit from the website as their subject is explained there in more details or users can find daily news about them - aluminium, alumina and bauxite (bauxite is first processed into alumina and then into aluminium and after that foil or alloys or parts of things (plains, cars, furniture etc) are made from aluminium ingots as a final product). The website contains extensive information on the history of aluminium, aluminium production and ways of using aluminium - in design, transport, construction. LOscritor 16:10, 27 October 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.248.20.6 ( talk)
[16:41:48] <COIBot> 102 records; Top 10 wikis where aluminiumleader.com has been added: ru.wikipedia (55), en.wikipedia (11), de.wikipedia (10), it.wikipedia (9), es.wikipedia (6), lt.wikipedia (2), et.wikipedia (2), pl.wikipedia (2), fr.wikipedia (2), lv.wikipedia (1).
Due to one mistakes which was done on 30th Oct.. this URL series is blocked.. This website comprises fantastic Hindi article over music.. u people can see this website one more time.. it may be possible that owner of this website would not gone through terms and conditions properly, you should a more chance . thanks
I use this redirect service for my website because my hosting changes periodically, so it gives me a more or less stable place to link to. It has some electronics schematics and detailed descriptions of their operation that are useful to those who want to learn about electronics. The Lightning Stalker ( talk) 09:31, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I suspect this was added by mistake. I don't see anything particularly spammy about it. — Steve Summit ( talk) 13:44, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Today I was able to save this edit which included the url for sexhealthguru.com (and also this one which had the url in the section I was editing).
This URL was blacklisted yesterday as \bsexhealthguru\.com\b [61].
Is this a problem with the list? The blacklist entry? Or me? -- SiobhanHansa 12:31, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
This cleared up and began working properly a few hours later so expect it was just a glitch. -- SiobhanHansa 21:41, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
122.169.124.122 ( 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) Continually being added to every site under the sun.-- otherlleft ( talk) 11:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
wiki.d-addicts.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
Links to this unnnotable wiki have begun getting more and more prevalent, as both inappropriate "sources" and as external links across various Japanese actor articles. They are beeing added by IPs and registered users, so I don't think an IP block can help. Recent removals include three links removed from Yūya Yagira, 4 instances from Joo Jong-hyuk, 2 instances from Risa Kudō. There are now hundreds, if not thousands, of links to this wiki. This is no Memory Alpha. It is not an established wiki for using in ELs, and certainly not a valid source. I feel a blacklist is necessary to address this issue and stop this flood of spam. Additionally, the main site "d-addicts.com" actively promotes the downloading of illegal copyrighted versions of licensed series, which is a violation of WP:COPYRIGHT. It also has a secondary wiki on fansubs. Not sure if its better to just block d-addicts.com all together or just this problematic one. -- Collectonian ( talk · contribs) 10:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
mymetrostop.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
Persistent spamming on Washington Metro related articles from various IP addresses. Site is a business directory arranged by Metro station. Most recent diff here. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 05:53, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
82.42.175.146 ( 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)
IP user has been adding Spam links to the above address, onto various user talkpages - I propose that this link get's blacklisted I had proposed it on Meta but was redirect here. Dark Mage 09:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
These three four links have been repeatedly added by the same group of IPs and user to multiple articles:
Deli nk ( talk) 22:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Google Adsense IDs: 7505437796731158, 0540338099227977
MalSurf
-- A. B. ( talk • contribs) 20:34, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
There is no obvious encyclopaedic reason why we would ever want to link to a petition. There are a thousand and one reasons why POV-pushers would want to do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.176.82.42 ( talk) 21:47, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Caught red-handed for the fourth time today. See WikiProject Spam report. MER-C 10:04, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
trainpetdog.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 domain has been repeatedly added to dog-related articles. I removed it from 25 en.wikipedia articles yesterday and from pt.wikipedia and no.wikipedia today. After reading this link and this link I can only conclude that this is a criminal scam run from India and it should be blacklisted immediately. The pattern of adding the spam is interesting, a different IP address is used each time, but always from the same Indian-registered ISP. Below are a few of the IP addresses used, but this list is by no means exhaustive:
—Preceding unsigned comment added by TimTay ( talk • contribs)
Is a great site and doesn't count as spam but (and especially) freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com is user-written thus doesn't meet WP:RELIABILITY. There are 7134 hits for "rootsweb" in en and most of those seem to be refs. Saintrain ( talk) 01:05, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Do not attempt to visit the following site without first reading the comment below!
This is a malicious link which leads to a porn site with a malicious script which makes it very difficult to leave or close the page without force quitting the browser. It has only been added twice that I am aware of, here and here (in both cases a reference was removed and replaced by the link), but because of the nature of the link, and because Googling the url shows that it has been spammed all over the Internets today and yesterday it seems like a good idea to blacklist it now. -- Bonadea ( talk) 08:32, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
freewebs.com/savenyc: 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
These are just some of the link additions that I saw, and there may be more. Whatever the merit of the "Save the World Trade Center" idea this site puts forth, the site repeatedly gets re-added to various Wikipedia pages including Skyscraper, Empire State Building, Brooklyn, and others. The IP changes from time to time, so I think the blacklist is the better way to deal with this. -- Aude ( talk) 00:04, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Massive coordinated citation spam. See WikiProject Spam report. MER-C 12:57, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
See WikiProject Spam report. MER-C 13:22, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
swamilive.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
[20] and [21] by JeremyJamesJohnson ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)
[22] by Atribuncle ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)
[23] by Crustacean Consumed ( 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) (a wordplay on the username of the user who had reverted the previous instance)
[24] and [25] by Stan Harrison ( 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)
And that's just the last few hours. -- Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 03:36, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
zuguide.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 link has recently started to be added by a few newly registered users to the articles of various actors. The site contains trailers from films. Although the new users and the site itself contend that the trailers are licensed, copyright questions still remain. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 22:33, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
This guy has been POV pushing through spam to self published pieces for a long time. I asked for and received blacklisting on a bunch of blogspot articles and ezine.com last year on Meta [26].
Turns out he's been back with his own domain since March of this year. Sites added to multiple articles by multiple IPs over a fairly long period of time so blocks and protection aren't going to work.
See further documentation of recent actions at User:SiobhanHansa/Checks#Articles_by_David_Ben-Ariel.
Thanks. -- SiobhanHansa 15:14, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
-- A. B. ( talk • contribs) 15:25, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Large amount of links on lots of articles, added rapidly. Could be script based, maybe. - MrOllie ( talk) 20:45, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
88.249.98.46 ( 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)
I have removed the advertisement many times. IP blocked twice, but it is back again. Site has no useful content. -- þħɥʂıɕıʄʈʝɘɖı 17:54, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
-- A. B. ( talk • contribs) 02:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
528hazelwood.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
Some pretty random personal blog, but a static (update: not sure if it is static, as it is assigned by an ISP, but it doesn't seem to have been assigned to anyone except the person behind 528hazelwood
Protonk (
talk) 18:49, 31 October 2008 (UTC)) IP
keeps inserting this exact
diff each time. If they did it more frequently I'd just block the IP, but this works too.
Protonk (
talk)
15:07, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
www.greatdogsite.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
Added by a number of IPs to a bunch of dog breed articles with misleading edit summaries ("fixed citation", "broken link", etc). Exactly one link added per IP in the 72.184.0.0/16 range, which makes me incredibly suspicious. Even more suspicious is that all the articles they've been added to, so far, start with 'A'... Zetawoof( ζ) 04:55, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
asyncop.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
Per
this please add \basyncop\.com\b
- it should have been added here instead of the global blacklist. Once added here, it will be removed at Meta. —
Mike.
lifeguard |
@en.wb
23:30, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
All IPs have been warned and the 65.118.76.139 IP has been blocked once but the link continues to be re-added. -- SiobhanHansa 14:49, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
injusticeusa.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
jewcon.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
These appear to be anti-semitic hate sites masquerading as a "judicial misconduct" sites.
Spammed to Proskauer Rose in place of its normal homepage ( see this diff) by
User 75.4.248.245 spammed this link to the Proskauer Rose article here. I will be requesting protection for this page. -- Eastlaw ( talk) 22:01, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
IP has been blocked for excessive linkspamming. See initial report at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#markets.com. --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 20:12, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
4dasoul.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
See WikiProject Spam report/{{WPSPAM|247141715#http://spam.4dasoul.com}}. MER-C 10:49, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
This commercial site has been added to multiple HIV/AIDS-related articles by the single-purpose account (and now banned) User:Plwha and sockpuppets, including
Sufficient warnings have been made, but the editor appears to IP-hop to avoid the possibility of blocks. The webpage itself contains a small amount of partly inaccurate travel advice for HIV-positive travelers and nothing of relevance for any of the articles to which it is repeatedly added.
By User Plwha: [33], [34], [35], [36].
By 86.121.195.144 on 10 November: [37], [38], [39], [40], [41], [42], [43], [44]
An edit by 86.121.193.176 replaces a relevant and functional Wikilink.
Examples from IP 86.121.193.29 include: [45]
This by 86.121.193.7 replaces multiple bona fide links with the plwha webpage. Keepcalmandcarryon ( talk) 17:43, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
An anon user has been using multiple sites to forward those who click on the links to a site using a referal tag, and edit warring to add these links.
None of the listed sites are used for legitimate links. --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 18:09, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
hosuronline.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
An anonymous user has been restoring this link on Mehndi for quite a long time now, from lots of IPs. Warnings and explanations haven't made a dent, and last time the article was semi protected he just waited it out, so now I think we need to take this step. Partial lists of IPs below.
Thanks for your attention. - MrOllie ( talk) 13:40, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
I am requesting that this be removed. This is required to add a verifiable 3rd party reference to an article (which I would mention, but I can't because the spam filter even blocks on this page). It's not clear why this is on the list in the first place, as it seems to be a straightforward news site. Mdwh ( talk) 01:38, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I have been contributing to the Green Tea Page since its inception - recently I moved one of my citations that had existed for years on the Green Tea page from the second instance of the discussion of Green Tea history in China to the first instance (the grammatically the more correct thing to do). The reaction from Ohnoitsjamie (an editor I've had issues with before showing a particular bias) was to remove 1) ALL my references immediately, 2) ban my IP for protesting, 3)indicate he would not discuss the issue further (despite Wikipedia's rules on trying to arbitrate the issue) 3) blacklist my site when I tried to get around his jihad against it because of his insistance not to discuss the issue further. Efforts I made to reinstate the reference were because of his insistence not to discuss the issue futher and my inability to get anyone else to respond to my concerns -- however, they only seemed to give him more justification to define my site as "rogue" to get around his unfair bannings and citation removal in the first place. If ohnoitsjamie had in issue with my moving my original citation the appropriate thing to do would have been to move it back. Instead my contention i he displayed a particular bias and heavyhandedness towards my citation versus others on the same page by removing (rather than moving back) *ALL* citations because I questioned his authority and pointed out his bias. Please see the greentealovers.com discussion and his responses at the bottom of the ohnoitsjamie talk page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ohnoitsjamie. I feel he is unfairly targetting my site. My simple request is that the greentealovers.com site be unbanned from the local blacklist and references I had on the green tea page prior to October 07, 2008 be reinstated. If he wishes to keep the citation in the same place (at the point that Chinese History referenced the second time in the page), although its grammatically incorrect, I am willing to compromise on that. What is the wikipedia policy for editors who demonstrate this type of bias and treat some contributors differently than others??? I've never had such an issue like that with any wikipedia editor before in all my years of contributions. Any issues have always been reasonably resolved in a mutually collaborative way.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpeizer ( talk • contribs) 17:12, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
I am formally requesting a third unbiased party and not Ohnoitsjamie review this as I do not consider Ohnoitsjamie an objective party. He is the only editor I have ever had an issue with is all my years as a wikipedia contributor. The reference in question had been there for years and its clear other references on that page also sell tea. Please review my site (216.131.68.51/greenteahealth.htm) it is rich in green tea medical, preparation, and history information and as such has been a contributor for wikipedia for years. The appropriate thing for you to have done if you had an issue was to simply replace the citation in its original position. Instead Ohnoitsjamie chose to remove ONLY my references (all of them) while seemingly ignoring the other sites which also sold tea on the page. Any sockpuppets etc. were the result of your unfair bias towards my account, and designed to circumvent your banning it while as at the same time indicating your unwillingness to discuss the issue further in violation of wikipedia arbitration rules. You're only now commenting it seems because eI have put in a formal request to unban. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpeizer ( talk • contribs) 17:42, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Again I request an unbiased third party editor and not Ohnoitsjamie (the editor that is at the source of my concern) review this issue. Ohnoitsjamie is correct in that I have contributed to the green and white tea pages over years and have cited greentealovers.com, the site providing those contributions. I also concur with his sockpuppet inference. Having been blocked inappropriately and told the issue would not be discussed further I did take the issue into my own hands when there was no feedback to address my concerns with this editor. There are few other options when he can cut off conversation and ban and blacklist at will. Ohnoitsjamie seemingly has an issue only with greentealovers.com because I question some of his judgements. I think he is biased because he deals differently with my information site, which also happens to sell teas demonstrating health benefits while having no issue with vendors like Stash Tea and blogs with tea advertising wrapped around their information also being listed on the same wikipedia GREEN TEA page. Although this request is to unblock greentealovers I seriously question *HOW* he dealt with my recent citation edit -- by removing all citations and also indicating he would not discuss the issue further. Any blocking and subsequent banning stems from the original bias I am questioning. Please note editor Ohnoitsjamie is still making no attempt to discuss the issue directly with me to come to a compromise as I have offered. Rather he prefers to continue to justify his bias. Jpeizer ( talk • contribs)
That is PRECISELY why I am requesting a third part review of my information site (216.131.68.51/greenteahealth.htm) and of this issue. Ohnoitsjamie continues on a witchhunt for the greentealovers.com information site that has been contributing to the GREEN TEA pages for years with citations while completely ignoring the blatant citations of major commercial tea companies on the green tea page. Ohnoitsjamie seemingly ignores the comments I just noted another editor made to my original complaint related to just that issue filed a complaint about it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpeizer ( talk • contribs) 18:56, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Aude - first, thanks for looking at this as an objective third party. I have put in this formal request to have greentealovers.com unblocked. In my defense I'd like you to note the followingL My site cites reputable peer reviewed journals for ALL its aggregated health information. Please see: 216.131.68.51/greenteahealthcancer.htm. Similarly it gets its processing and preparation information directly from the largest producer of green tea in Japan which it also cites appropriately on the bottom of every page (Some images and information are courtesy of ITO EN, Inc.). The question I have is why was my contributions and citations were good enough for Wikipedia for years especially in its early days when it need non-tech information, but now it isn't. Why was my reference to Tea History in China removed now (after YEARS) by OhnoitsJamie simply because it was moved -- not added. Most importantly, why did editor Ohnoitsjamie, after repeatedly being referred to the bias even by two other editors -- not act upon it? I seriously have to question the actions he took in this case and wonder if others have been also treated in an unbalanced way. This bias alone warrants unblocking consideration. I notice on his info page he talks about the numnber of times his pages have been hacked/abused. I have to wonder if it has something to do with the unbalanced way this editor treats contributors? Also in light of your green tea page edits are references citations [3] and [8] really still appropraite by the standards you are using to qualify these references? comment added by Jpeizer ( talk • contribs) 18:56, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm no longer requesting that the greentealovers reference be cited on the green tea page because the objective editors (Other than OhnoitsJamie) dealt with it in a balanced and fair way by deleting other references of similar context on the green tea page. I contend the argument to maintain the citation was previously valid when similar citations existed there from Tea vendors and OhNoitsJamie did nothing to remove them despite another editor stating a case for equity as well.
1) refusing to deal unbiasedly with the other listings like Stash and Celestial tea on the same page. 2) refused to discuss the matter further in violation of Wiki rules on trying to come to a reasonable compromise.
There is a cause and effect here: Since the original blocking of greentealovers.com was done in a biased manner -- it should be unblocked. Its enough the citation was removed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.123.34.178 ( talk) 19:26, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
It's unfortunate and disheartening to see this self-moralizing about "self-interests" and "unethical behavior" in this discussion about a particular citation. The facts are that the Greentealovers site was a welcome and valid contributor to the wikipedia green tea page for years until Wikipedia decided to "upgrade" its citation policies -- after it had acheived enough credibility to diss the contributors that allowed it to break out of the perception by many that it was more a site for the technology-minded. Still greentealovers.com had as much validity to provide references to the green tea page as celestial seasoning, Stash Tea and other blog/advertisement references that existed on it -- and that was my argument -- PARITY AND BALANCE --until they were removed. Editors showing bias to one set of citations and not the other was hardly fair and balanced. It's unfortunate that the issue with greentealovers has spilled over into the editors deciding to also censor my addition of valid nonprofit technology references like capaciteria.org or my book about the Dynamics or Technology for Social Change. Capaciteria.org for example is a totally free nonprofit capacity resource index that I maintain for the benefit of the sector. These references were added to WIKIPEDIA over years along with other information on the topic of nonprofit technology and never challanged by wikipedia until the editors wished to make a point about this separate issue on greentealovers.com. If you'd like to throw the baby out with the bathwater and eliminate these other resources contributed to wikipedia in the past, thats fine. But please do keep the editorial self-moralizing about out of the discussion when valid contributions become invalid and unethical depending upon the year and editor deciding upon them. What disturbs me is the hypocracy.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.123.34.178 ( talk)
Hello, I am proposing the removal of mysmp from the spam blacklist. This website is a free financial encyclopedia offering traders and finance professionals to develop their trading and financial markets acumen. There are very few websites that have the detailed insight that is presented on mysmp.com. We were originally blacklisted for link spamming. I honestly did not intend to "spam" wikipedia with the content on mysmp and am truly sorry if I had offended anyone in any way. I truly believed that it added value to the community and the owners of each subject actually agreed with me by leaving it on their wiki. mysmp has quite an abundance of great content that we would love to share with the wiki community. Please let me know if I can provide any further information and I would be happy to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.236.89 ( talk • contribs)
Why is this blacklisted, seems legit to me? I have no Idiaho how to apply to get my link removed from blacklist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tasselnfringe ( talk • contribs) 16:31, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I had no problem adding this link last week to the wiki page for Intelius. I added the link to cite my sources stating that this company has been signing up customers to an unauthorized service called 24Protect Plus. My entry was removed and the link was blacklisted. I found numerous other websites that allege the same activity from this company. Complaintsboard.com is a forum where customers can voice their complaints. I have also found several articles that address the integrity issues with this company's business practices. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LuisM111 ( talk • contribs) 22:55, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
I am requesting that the domain sermonaudio.com be considered for removal from the local black list. I tried to update the entry about Giuseppi Logan with a reference to the page (blacklisted domain/sermoninfo.asp?SID=10180811720)that houses a recent interview that proves what is said about him being found by a mission group in New York. The article currently states that it is not know if he is alive. This is a good reference to prove that he is. Evidently someone in the past has abused the use of this site as a resource but I believe this is a valid use. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.155.163.233 ( talk) 17:17, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Is that final? Is there a way for a blacklisted domain to be used in case like this. The article says that the guy may be dead! This is proof that he is not. 72.155.163.233 ( talk) 13:12, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Declined as stale. MaxSem( Han shot first!) 10:23, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
I propose to remove this website from the black list as it is a highly educative and informative resource on the aluminium production. It was added only to articles which can profit from the website as their subject is explained there in more details or users can find daily news about them - aluminium, alumina and bauxite (bauxite is first processed into alumina and then into aluminium and after that foil or alloys or parts of things (plains, cars, furniture etc) are made from aluminium ingots as a final product). The website contains extensive information on the history of aluminium, aluminium production and ways of using aluminium - in design, transport, construction. LOscritor 16:10, 27 October 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.248.20.6 ( talk)
[16:41:48] <COIBot> 102 records; Top 10 wikis where aluminiumleader.com has been added: ru.wikipedia (55), en.wikipedia (11), de.wikipedia (10), it.wikipedia (9), es.wikipedia (6), lt.wikipedia (2), et.wikipedia (2), pl.wikipedia (2), fr.wikipedia (2), lv.wikipedia (1).
Due to one mistakes which was done on 30th Oct.. this URL series is blocked.. This website comprises fantastic Hindi article over music.. u people can see this website one more time.. it may be possible that owner of this website would not gone through terms and conditions properly, you should a more chance . thanks
I use this redirect service for my website because my hosting changes periodically, so it gives me a more or less stable place to link to. It has some electronics schematics and detailed descriptions of their operation that are useful to those who want to learn about electronics. The Lightning Stalker ( talk) 09:31, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I suspect this was added by mistake. I don't see anything particularly spammy about it. — Steve Summit ( talk) 13:44, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Today I was able to save this edit which included the url for sexhealthguru.com (and also this one which had the url in the section I was editing).
This URL was blacklisted yesterday as \bsexhealthguru\.com\b [61].
Is this a problem with the list? The blacklist entry? Or me? -- SiobhanHansa 12:31, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
This cleared up and began working properly a few hours later so expect it was just a glitch. -- SiobhanHansa 21:41, 19 September 2008 (UTC)