This page is an archive of past discussions for the period November 2013 ( index). Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
epnrstatus.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
historyofnations.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 – This site uses Wikipedia content without attribution and is placed into the External links section of about 100 'History of ...' articles. Abductive ( reasoning) 20:40, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
[I am relisting the following entry which was archived without discussion or action. Scammers are continuing to add these links so please consider adding them to the blacklist. — Psychonaut ( talk) 16:18, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
The above websites have been repeatedly spamlinked from Kaun Banega Crorepati (an Indian version of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?). They all falsely claim to be official KBC websites, or else the users inserting links to them falsely claim or imply that they are official KBC websites. As far as I can tell the websites are operated by scammers trying to trick members of the public into paying fees (via PayPal) to register as a contestant. See MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/November 2012#AdSense pub-6522157377920590 for a previous report. Some or all of these sites are already on XLinkBot's revert list, but some particularly persistent spammers are using autoconfirmed accounts (e.g., Neel12mani ( talk · contribs)) to insert the links. Note that the blogspot domains exist on many TLDs (.in, .de, .com, etc.). — Psychonaut ( talk) 17:52, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
lespaulstore.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 Just simple spam, repeatedly being added by IP editors. Wait--it geolocates to Hungary and that rings a bell, like I've been here before. Drmies ( talk) 03:04, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Done, I haven't really looked into the problematic edits myself and defer to your judgement, but lespaulstore.com certainly is spammed persistently enough to warrant the blacklist entry. Amalthea 08:39, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
adf.ly: 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 Personally I'm surprised this isn't here already. There may be some reason I'm not aware of why it's not blacklisted, but just in case it should be, I'm bringing it up here. For those unfamiliar, it's a URL shortener similar to bit.ly or TinyURL, only it displays an interstitial advertisement before linking to the site, and gives the person who shortened the link a cut of the proceeds. It serves a good purpose, but there'd be no legitimate reason to link to it here, other than maybe if it ever got its own article. flarn2006 [ u t c] time: 04:52, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
tulpa.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
And so on and so forth. IsaacAA ( talk) 11:57, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
recordninja.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
Repeatedly added by an IP user, who has been repeatedly warned and then blocked. Still being added as of today. A new user account has also begun adding the link, and it is clearly a sock of the IP. Link is constantly added the the Background check article, and is a link to a commercial background check website.-- Dmol ( talk) 09:42, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
A link-shortening site that is being used by spammers, such as here. Not only that, it's one that generates revenue for every click of the link. As a result, this site has two reasons to be blacklisted, as it hides the true link (alonging circumvention of the blacklist) and it also encourages the less salubrious of people to go and spam their link everywhere. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 16:08, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
A site that reposts software testing articles. This is quite common with bloggers. The problem is that no attribution is given to the original blogger. This is a copyright violation. The IP who has been adding links to articles on the site doesn't seem to want to discuss. They have been removed for now, but I seem to recall that the IP has changed on occasion. The most recent IP's additions can be found at Special:Contributions/115.248.233.202 Walter Görlitz ( talk) 00:50, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Not sure what happened to this blacklisting request. There's been continued spamming since, so requesting again. -- Ronz ( talk) 19:31, 14 November 2013 (UTC) Done OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:52, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I believe a few of these entries are missing the "b" part of the leading "\b":
– RobinHood70 talk 06:07, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- what might the other two be? --
Redrose64 (
talk)
21:15, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Done, hopefully I haven't messed anything up — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 09:59, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
The site and a few other knife sharpening sites have been spamming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knife_sharpening I undid the edits in this diff http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Knife_sharpening&diff=581155583&oldid=577001352
hipromtech.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
sgcafe.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 unreliable source that is growing in popularity (A little above 50 articles used it in July, and now over 100 I believe). Discussed shortly at Reliable sources board and was considered unreliable. It is a blog with four writers and no mention of editorial department. Translations of interviews can not be confirmed for accuracy or source [sgcafe.com/2013/06/creator-metal-gear-series-hideo-kojima-metal-gears-solid-v-global-phenomenon/ 1], uses other blogs as references [sgcafe.com/2013/09/male-anime-fans-characters-look-like-engage-compensated-dating/ 2], and violates copyright restrictions [sgcafe.com/2013/09/kokonoe-will-playable-blazblue-chrono-phantasma-ps3-dlc-character/ 3]. DragonZero ( Talk · Contribs) 20:52, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
glamchika.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
A series of dynamic IPs has been posting in a number of articles about the Indian film industry. Rarely has a single IP done more than a handful of articles. (at least in the instances that I have seen). -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:14, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
firstmovie.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 [11] [12] [13] — rybec 06:10, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
RB231 ( 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) User reported at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam in 2012; blocked for spamming 7 August 2013; persists in spamming. Blacklist seems to be the only sure remedy here. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 00:29, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Examples:
Users have been creating articles for dead and living Turkish composers. The only reference they have used is musiki.org. Musiki points to a site where you can buy the software program Mus2okur. "Mus2okur is a software program that teaches the basics of Turkish music... The software comes with an expansive database of information on prominent composers, lyricists, compilers and other notable people including photos, biographies and lists of works." Program is €40. No mention of what editorial mechanisms are in place. Some of the people added appear notable, others do not. Bülent Türkeli appears to be an example of a non-notable person. Bgwhite ( talk) 07:45, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
We are a group of researchers trying to put our data available on the web. Please see: http://akademik.bahcesehir.edu.tr/~bbozkurt/ and http://compmusic.upf.edu/node/8. We are not trying to promote any software, it is only that we don't have other resources in English that could be used as a reference. As a research group leader, I pay students(there are 5 of them) to put our data on wikipedia which I hope may be extended by interested contributors. We were planning to put what ever information we have about 500 Turkish music composers on wikipedia, some short, some longer but none of them I would consider useless (I think just the birth and death dates are important if you are interested in that information for whatever the reason). If these risk of getting deleted, I'd rather not waste my research money on that. Please inform me if this will be the case and we will stop contributing to wikipedia. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.255.77.106 ( talk) 08:56, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
The reference (musiki.org) is a digital encyclopaedia, hence I don't see why any printed encyclopaedia would be preferred as a better reference. A printed book also costs some money and in fact most often more difficult to access. For example, the biggest printed encyclopaedia on Turkish makam music is the following: http://www.kitapyurdu.com/kitap/default.asp?id=106810 which is: i) out of print, ii) more costly, iii) less reliable from my point of view since I have it and have seen many inconsistencies, even racist argumentations inside. The reason we refer to the software is we have the information easily accessible to us and I can ask students who have no knowledge on the subject to put this information in wikipedia by just copy-paste and some editing (but I cannot ask them to do an investigation using multiple resources). Let me reduce it to this question: we have the limited resources to put this data on wikipedia, should we do it or not? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BarisBozkurtBahcesehir ( talk • contribs) 15:59, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
The reason we started putting references to musiki.org was that our entries got deleted due to unavailability of references. Will the entries stay there without the reference? if yes, we can put our data without the reference. If no, we stop contributing. Thanks for your explanations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BarisBozkurtBahcesehir ( talk • contribs) 15:14, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. It is NOT MY pay site. I bought the digital book and we are putting some information from there. I am trying to contribute to freely available material and somehow some people already made up their minds (without asking, questioning) we are spamming wikipedia. Great! I will ask the students to stop the process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BarisBozkurtBahcesehir ( talk • contribs) 13:14, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
idolfeatures.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
A site owned by new user Ccharles32 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (who also edited as 173.17.118.135 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)), who has been spamming links across WP for about a week. All of his contribs to articles are link additions, so I will give a few examples with the explanation that all of his mainspace edits are spam, and were all reverted by Nymf: [14], [15]. User also displays a complete lack of understanding of Wikipedia, having left this message after blanking an MfD. MSJapan ( talk) 23:01, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
This site was blacklisted after spamming by multiple IP editors. I have found that it is a notable Music blog and I have started an article about it ( Koolmuzone). But I was prompted by the spam filter when I entered this link in the infobox. Besides I find that the most of the ips who did spamming were on a single ip range and range block could have helped here. Also this spamming seems to have stopped now. So I request it to be removed from the blacklist. Thanks -- SMS Talk 17:22, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
I cannot seem to find anything related on the local blacklist and I'm hitting the blacklist trying to use it as a source. No obvious reason to blacklist jumps out. I'm assuming some regex is involved with the -games.com suffix. :) · Salvidrim!· ✉ 23:44, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
Why is this site blacklisted? I don't see any reason in the log. I wanted to add some information to an article about Greg Hetson, but I couldn't add references, as dyingscene.com is blacklisted. Nazgul02 ( talk)
It appears this site was blacklisted back in 2010 for sourcing its own articles on Wikipedia. I have personally contacted the owner of the site and was assured they no longer contribute to wikipedia from their own site. Since it's been 3 years, my recommendation would be to unblock them in order to allow our contributors to reference them for articles related to punk music. - Dr.Music —Preceding undated comment added 18:39, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
I understand the desire to avoid links to online petition-gathering sites, as a likely spam source. However, the blanket banning of any URL with the word "petition" in it (as best as I can understand the Regex, it ain't my thing) has been causing false spam flags in multiple articles that I deal with, because they link to legitimate news articles dealing with someone petitioning the court ( example) or to copies of such court petitions ( example). - Nat Gertler ( talk) 02:56, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
\bpetition(?:online|s)?\b
. @
NatGertler: You're correct in your understanding. Also,
JzG (
talk ·
contribs) added what evolved into this filter
here, but I can't find a log entry for it.
Jackmcbarn (
talk)
03:09, 26 August 2013 (UTC)\bpetition(?:online|s24|site|spot|-?them)\.com\b
) so I'm not sure the local one is even necessary. If it is, I agree with DMacks that something like \bpetition(?:online|s)?[A-Za-z0-9]*\.(com|org|net)\b
would prevent a lot of the false positives.
TDL (
talk)
22:31, 26 August 2013 (UTC)This is a website that I have used extensively as a source for the Nike Total 90 and Nike Mercurial Vapor articles. I have no idea whether anyone has used this site to spam Wikipedia in the past, but as you can tell, my intentions with it are purely encyclopaedic. I would appreciate this site being unblocked, since it is one of the leading resources on soccer equipment. – Pee Jay 09:25, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
I am astonished why this site is blocked as spam. This is first time I am trying to link an interesting relevant article reference on an existing page on wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.44.113.253 ( talk • contribs) 06:14, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings. I was tasked with editing an article that has been rejected twice. I need to use academicroom.com as a source but it is blacklisted. I went to the "Spam Blacklist" page ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Spam_blacklist) and it is not listed there. I can't speak for others, but my for own field, which is nanotechnology, Academic Room is a very credible resource, running out of Harvard University. I don't think it serves anyone well to put a blanked ban on it. I therefore request this site be removed from the blacklist. The resources that I need to use can be found in the following hierarchy of the blacklisted site: /physical-sciences/nanotechnology Nanotech-editor ( talk) 21:26, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
I believe www.historyandpolicy.org should be univerally whitelisted. It is an academic research site on UK business, history, and government policy. See, for example, the citation flagged by the spambot on w:Supermarket. I assume there are papers that discuss individual businesses, and this is what fooled the bot. Choor monster ( talk) 17:44, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
I am tempted here to suggest to request whitelisting. It was clearly spammed (and they noted the effects of their spamming - their ranking went up massively, their SEO worked). Defer to Whitelist. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 08:08, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
beacon.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
Beacon Press is a Boston-based independent publisher. I don't know a lot about them, but I understand them to be a legit outfit. A blacklisted-links template popped up in Nancy Gertner today; the article cites the Beacon Press website for Gertner's book in the EL section, which I think is fair. Reviewing [ the history] it appears it was blacklisted in July of 2012 because of 3 abusers with "systematic efforts to promote this publisher and their books." I'm inclined to think that blocking the entire publisher's site isn't the proper scale, and this should be unblocked. But maybe I'm missing the magnitude of the problem, and only the individual books that are not a problem should be whitelisted? Thanks. jhawkinson ( talk) 06:56, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Due to unknown reasons this link is blocked and shows in the Spam Blacklist. Infibeam.com is an authorized Indian e-commerce company. We provide our customers with best deals and make their hectic life easy with the online shopping facility from their homes or offices. Any customer that visits Wikipedia will be able to go to our home site link directly and would not have to face the any problem for searching the link through Wikipedia. We assure that we will abide by the content policies of your sites in the future to avoid any such issues. :) · Rachnarawat· ✉ 05:23, 24 September 2013 GMT + 5:30
Appears to be a legitimiate website with links to KCL. Barney the barney barney ( talk) 20:22, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
This was the incident that triggered the addition of this domain to the spam blacklist. The incident lists a number of examples of link spam - but most are examples for a similar domain, "areacode.org". I can't find any examples of spam for countrycode.org. The two domains are registered to different people, but the websites look very similar, and both link to the same parent organisation "numberingplans.com".
There are 18 pages that reference this website, and it looks like the references were all added before the blacklist (i.e. before June 2010). These pages have all recently been tagged with the "Blacklisted-links" template (which lead me here). Can this domain be unlisted, or should I remove the links from the pages instead? Thanks in advance! Dracunculus ( talk) 19:17, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
bvinewbie.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 Good day. Looked through the information, but I can't see why this guide is on the blacklist. I believe that it contains unique information about the British Virgin Islands, ones that can't be found anywhere else. For example information on immigration and work permits.— Preceding unsigned comment added by John McConvill ( talk • contribs)
I am following up to VRTS ticket # 2013081210002123 sent by a representative of prouty.org, which was blacklisted in August 2011.
The site wasn't blacklisted on the basis of any discussion on this page, but rather based on an ANI discussion (archived here). The blacklisting was apparently done in response to disruption caused by linking to an attack page at www.prouty.org/mcadams/
I know that we don't de-list sites based on requests from people with a conflict of interest, and anyone who monitors this page will know I have declined such requests on many occasions.
However, based on that ANI conversation, it seems that the blacklisting may have been done hastily. The final comment from bureaucrat Infrogmation ( talk · contribs) suggests that this listing should be revisited.
I suggest not de-listing, but modifying the entry to blacklist only that attack page. I would do it myself, but I prefer the transparency of discussion this public page first, rather than back-room OTRS communications. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 22:17, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Not done - I ended up whitelisting the 'about' page instead, which seemed to satisfy the prouty.org representative. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 19:42, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
NORM supplies information that upsets some people. It is a site with foreskin restoration information and is anti-routine male infant circumcision. This means that people have split into entrenched warring camps. This site is likely to have offended someone rather than, itself, being spam. It does have items for sale, yes, but this is not its primary function. Please look at the original reaosn for listing with care and determine if the site is genuinely spammy, with a view to delisting it. Fiddle Faddle 16:59, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Required links have been whitelisted since. Amalthea 10:18, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
NOTE: I've no problem with the way this request has been handled. However, for the record, there is absolutely nothing that makes advocacy sites, per se, ineligible for use as a reliable source. Perhaps Jamie ( Ohnoitsjamie ( talk · contribs)) needs to reread the policy he refers us to, in particular, the WP:BIASED section of WP:RS!! It reads in part, "reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective"! It looks to me like Jamie twice misrepresented policy by indicating that advocacy sites, per se, do not meet WP:RS guidelines - once after having the issue pointed out! (by Eaglizard ( talk · contribs)) I do not like to see administrators, in particular, misrepresent policy like that. -- Elvey ( talk) 19:54, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
I believe that ReverbNation (Alexa ranked 1526 Globally) should be removed from the blacklist.
Also, the editor who blacklisted the site did not log any reason for the entry and has since stated s/he would not oppose de-blacklisting. Jaguar766 ( talk) 22:42, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
I think this site does not deserve to be blacklisted. On the site you can find replacement service for the old MSN Gaming Zone. This should be noted in the MSN Gaming Zone article, but it can't due to the blacklist.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.192.102.20 ( talk • contribs) 09:11, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Not done Wikipedia isn't an advertisement venue for a non-notable website. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:02, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
abseits-soccer is a website that contains info on German football and is widely used by
WP:FOOTY. The trigger is apparently \bsoccer\.com\b
. Cannot see a reason why abseits-soccer would be blocked for spam, so I believe this is a case of a false positive. Additionally, this entry is from April 2012, but has no reasoning given in the
log. --
Madcynic (
talk)
14:21, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
(?<=//|\.)soccer\.com\b
to fix the same problem as happened at
#Hyphenated domain being misinterpreted?.
Jackmcbarn (
talk)
14:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
It do offer some great tips and solutions for guys like me, so I just think this site is not deserved to blacklisted.
In conclusion we request immediate removal of TheWebMiner from the wikipedia blacklist and its return to the web scraping search page on the site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.85.0.97 ( talk) 15:34, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
i want to state at first that i am not in connection to the website administrators although i use it for personal extractions that are required in my field of activity, which is marketing. I also want to be clear that my extractions are relatively small so i don't pay any money for that service and i was not asked to do this request. I simply think that thewebminer is a very efficient tool for extractions. At first i've come to it browsing through Wikipedia and this is how i usually got to it, until the site was removed. I was curious about the removal so this is how i found out about the wikipedia blacklisting. I am only writing to you because i want you to reconsider the denial of the delisting and to take into consideration the fact that the web miner is a very popular tool within marketing companies like mine and it should have a place into wikipedia as it is extremely relevant to the web scraping topic. Laura Stein — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ady1689 ( talk • contribs) 01:55, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
i want to state at first that i am not in connection to the website administrators although i use it for personal extractions that are required in my field of activity, which is marketing. I also want to be clear that my extractions are relatively small so i don't pay any money for that service and i was not asked to do this request. I simply think that thewebminer is a very efficient tool for extractions. At first i've come to it browsing through Wikipedia and this is how i usually got to it, until the site was removed. I was curious about the removal so this is how i found out about the wikipedia blacklisting. I am only writing to you because i want you to reconsider the denial of the delisting and to take into consideration the fact that the web miner is a very popular tool within marketing companies like mine and it should have a place into wikipedia as it is extremely relevant to the web scraping topic. Laura Stein — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ady1689 ( talk • contribs) 01:55, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
style="overflow:auto...
is recognized as a SPAM site/link; style="width:...;overflow:auto...
isn't. –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
08:19, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm trying to troubleshoot an issue reported via OTRS where a person tried to add a link to one of the Requested Articles sections (their personal website). The domain has a pattern like so: www.<name>-actor.com
. I tried several combinations (e.g., myteethhurt-actor.com and foobar-actor.com and it seems the issue is the -actor
bit. The domain in question is not on either the local or global blacklists, and I can't find a pattern in either that would match "-actor" exactly. Should I request an exception or just ask the person to omit the link or is this something that we should fix? §
FreeRangeFrog
croak
21:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
\bactor(?:suriya|arya)?\.com\b
from meta added on
23:39, 28 November 2009 the user was optimizing several regex and goofed. The correct regex should be \bactor(suriya|arya)\.com\b
Werieth (
talk)
22:52, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
The entry for "\bstay[\w-]*\.co\.uk\b" was added on 12 April 2011 in response to this request. However, this rule is overly broad (it seems to catch any domain starting "stay" and ending ".co.uk"). This is causing problems with the link to www.staysure.co.uk on Sunday Times Fast Track 100. Could this rule be removed or rewritten to be more specific to the domains mentioned in the original request? Thank you. – PartTimeGnome ( talk | contribs) 17:16, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
At Meta, another user reported concern about blacklisting of jesus-passion.com. Existing links to this domain cannot be edited. The user was told that this domain is not blacklisted at meta, so it must be a local listing here. I don't see jesus-passion on the EN blacklist, but passion.com is there. Has the blacklisting of passion.com been extended to include the hyphenated form? If so, how can this be fixed? -- Orlady ( talk) 17:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
The problem is, that we have to take into account the possibility tha the rule maybe wanted to catch all possible instances of '<blah>-passion.com'. There are those typical domain ending (recently it was 'blahblahfacts.com', a large set of links all ending in 'facts.com'). I'd go for the whitelist here, for jesus-passion.ciom, keeps the already difficult regexes just a bit easier to read for those whose links are blocked.
I will have a look at what the passion rule was supposed to catch. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 03:47, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
The spammed link was indeed passion.com itself (see COIBot reports linked from the tracking, and follow 'tracked' in there to see the spamming cases). I have adapted the rule according to the suggestion by Jackmcbarn, http://www.jesus-passion.com should now be linkable. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 07:25, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
On meta, we use the gadget User:Erwin/SBHandler ( m:MediaWiki:Gadget-SBHandler.js) to add items to the blacklist on meta. It works from the Spam-blacklist talkpage ( m:Talk:Spam blacklist), and from the cross-wiki reports generated by COIBot (' m:User:COIBot/XWiki/example.org'). I think that this tool could also be handy here on en.wikipedia, knowing that we have here also the talkpage of the blacklist ('here'), and the local reports (' Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/Local/example.org') where this could be enabled.
Would there be interest to have this tool here, and people who are capable/interested to move the gadget here (I tried to hack and activate it through my local .js, but I could not get it to work)?
(Not willingly wanting to complicate things .. but one could consider to expand the tool to also work on XLinkBot's revertlist - being capable to blacklist from there, or to revertlist from here). -- Dirk Beetstra T C 12:32, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Returning to check something that I'd reported at the start of July (because the spammer is still going), it looks like none of the proposed additions have been processed this month - the only additions to the blacklist have been from admins adding URLs directly. Is there a reason why these aren't being processed? -- McGeddon ( talk) 09:48, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions for the period November 2013 ( index). Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
epnrstatus.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
historyofnations.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 – This site uses Wikipedia content without attribution and is placed into the External links section of about 100 'History of ...' articles. Abductive ( reasoning) 20:40, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
[I am relisting the following entry which was archived without discussion or action. Scammers are continuing to add these links so please consider adding them to the blacklist. — Psychonaut ( talk) 16:18, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
The above websites have been repeatedly spamlinked from Kaun Banega Crorepati (an Indian version of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?). They all falsely claim to be official KBC websites, or else the users inserting links to them falsely claim or imply that they are official KBC websites. As far as I can tell the websites are operated by scammers trying to trick members of the public into paying fees (via PayPal) to register as a contestant. See MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/November 2012#AdSense pub-6522157377920590 for a previous report. Some or all of these sites are already on XLinkBot's revert list, but some particularly persistent spammers are using autoconfirmed accounts (e.g., Neel12mani ( talk · contribs)) to insert the links. Note that the blogspot domains exist on many TLDs (.in, .de, .com, etc.). — Psychonaut ( talk) 17:52, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
lespaulstore.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 Just simple spam, repeatedly being added by IP editors. Wait--it geolocates to Hungary and that rings a bell, like I've been here before. Drmies ( talk) 03:04, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Done, I haven't really looked into the problematic edits myself and defer to your judgement, but lespaulstore.com certainly is spammed persistently enough to warrant the blacklist entry. Amalthea 08:39, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
adf.ly: 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 Personally I'm surprised this isn't here already. There may be some reason I'm not aware of why it's not blacklisted, but just in case it should be, I'm bringing it up here. For those unfamiliar, it's a URL shortener similar to bit.ly or TinyURL, only it displays an interstitial advertisement before linking to the site, and gives the person who shortened the link a cut of the proceeds. It serves a good purpose, but there'd be no legitimate reason to link to it here, other than maybe if it ever got its own article. flarn2006 [ u t c] time: 04:52, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
tulpa.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
And so on and so forth. IsaacAA ( talk) 11:57, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
recordninja.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
Repeatedly added by an IP user, who has been repeatedly warned and then blocked. Still being added as of today. A new user account has also begun adding the link, and it is clearly a sock of the IP. Link is constantly added the the Background check article, and is a link to a commercial background check website.-- Dmol ( talk) 09:42, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
A link-shortening site that is being used by spammers, such as here. Not only that, it's one that generates revenue for every click of the link. As a result, this site has two reasons to be blacklisted, as it hides the true link (alonging circumvention of the blacklist) and it also encourages the less salubrious of people to go and spam their link everywhere. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 16:08, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
A site that reposts software testing articles. This is quite common with bloggers. The problem is that no attribution is given to the original blogger. This is a copyright violation. The IP who has been adding links to articles on the site doesn't seem to want to discuss. They have been removed for now, but I seem to recall that the IP has changed on occasion. The most recent IP's additions can be found at Special:Contributions/115.248.233.202 Walter Görlitz ( talk) 00:50, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Not sure what happened to this blacklisting request. There's been continued spamming since, so requesting again. -- Ronz ( talk) 19:31, 14 November 2013 (UTC) Done OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:52, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I believe a few of these entries are missing the "b" part of the leading "\b":
– RobinHood70 talk 06:07, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- what might the other two be? --
Redrose64 (
talk)
21:15, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Done, hopefully I haven't messed anything up — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 09:59, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
The site and a few other knife sharpening sites have been spamming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knife_sharpening I undid the edits in this diff http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Knife_sharpening&diff=581155583&oldid=577001352
hipromtech.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
sgcafe.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 unreliable source that is growing in popularity (A little above 50 articles used it in July, and now over 100 I believe). Discussed shortly at Reliable sources board and was considered unreliable. It is a blog with four writers and no mention of editorial department. Translations of interviews can not be confirmed for accuracy or source [sgcafe.com/2013/06/creator-metal-gear-series-hideo-kojima-metal-gears-solid-v-global-phenomenon/ 1], uses other blogs as references [sgcafe.com/2013/09/male-anime-fans-characters-look-like-engage-compensated-dating/ 2], and violates copyright restrictions [sgcafe.com/2013/09/kokonoe-will-playable-blazblue-chrono-phantasma-ps3-dlc-character/ 3]. DragonZero ( Talk · Contribs) 20:52, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
glamchika.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
A series of dynamic IPs has been posting in a number of articles about the Indian film industry. Rarely has a single IP done more than a handful of articles. (at least in the instances that I have seen). -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:14, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
firstmovie.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 [11] [12] [13] — rybec 06:10, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
RB231 ( 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) User reported at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam in 2012; blocked for spamming 7 August 2013; persists in spamming. Blacklist seems to be the only sure remedy here. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 00:29, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Examples:
Users have been creating articles for dead and living Turkish composers. The only reference they have used is musiki.org. Musiki points to a site where you can buy the software program Mus2okur. "Mus2okur is a software program that teaches the basics of Turkish music... The software comes with an expansive database of information on prominent composers, lyricists, compilers and other notable people including photos, biographies and lists of works." Program is €40. No mention of what editorial mechanisms are in place. Some of the people added appear notable, others do not. Bülent Türkeli appears to be an example of a non-notable person. Bgwhite ( talk) 07:45, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
We are a group of researchers trying to put our data available on the web. Please see: http://akademik.bahcesehir.edu.tr/~bbozkurt/ and http://compmusic.upf.edu/node/8. We are not trying to promote any software, it is only that we don't have other resources in English that could be used as a reference. As a research group leader, I pay students(there are 5 of them) to put our data on wikipedia which I hope may be extended by interested contributors. We were planning to put what ever information we have about 500 Turkish music composers on wikipedia, some short, some longer but none of them I would consider useless (I think just the birth and death dates are important if you are interested in that information for whatever the reason). If these risk of getting deleted, I'd rather not waste my research money on that. Please inform me if this will be the case and we will stop contributing to wikipedia. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.255.77.106 ( talk) 08:56, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
The reference (musiki.org) is a digital encyclopaedia, hence I don't see why any printed encyclopaedia would be preferred as a better reference. A printed book also costs some money and in fact most often more difficult to access. For example, the biggest printed encyclopaedia on Turkish makam music is the following: http://www.kitapyurdu.com/kitap/default.asp?id=106810 which is: i) out of print, ii) more costly, iii) less reliable from my point of view since I have it and have seen many inconsistencies, even racist argumentations inside. The reason we refer to the software is we have the information easily accessible to us and I can ask students who have no knowledge on the subject to put this information in wikipedia by just copy-paste and some editing (but I cannot ask them to do an investigation using multiple resources). Let me reduce it to this question: we have the limited resources to put this data on wikipedia, should we do it or not? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BarisBozkurtBahcesehir ( talk • contribs) 15:59, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
The reason we started putting references to musiki.org was that our entries got deleted due to unavailability of references. Will the entries stay there without the reference? if yes, we can put our data without the reference. If no, we stop contributing. Thanks for your explanations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BarisBozkurtBahcesehir ( talk • contribs) 15:14, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. It is NOT MY pay site. I bought the digital book and we are putting some information from there. I am trying to contribute to freely available material and somehow some people already made up their minds (without asking, questioning) we are spamming wikipedia. Great! I will ask the students to stop the process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BarisBozkurtBahcesehir ( talk • contribs) 13:14, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
idolfeatures.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
A site owned by new user Ccharles32 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (who also edited as 173.17.118.135 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)), who has been spamming links across WP for about a week. All of his contribs to articles are link additions, so I will give a few examples with the explanation that all of his mainspace edits are spam, and were all reverted by Nymf: [14], [15]. User also displays a complete lack of understanding of Wikipedia, having left this message after blanking an MfD. MSJapan ( talk) 23:01, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
This site was blacklisted after spamming by multiple IP editors. I have found that it is a notable Music blog and I have started an article about it ( Koolmuzone). But I was prompted by the spam filter when I entered this link in the infobox. Besides I find that the most of the ips who did spamming were on a single ip range and range block could have helped here. Also this spamming seems to have stopped now. So I request it to be removed from the blacklist. Thanks -- SMS Talk 17:22, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
I cannot seem to find anything related on the local blacklist and I'm hitting the blacklist trying to use it as a source. No obvious reason to blacklist jumps out. I'm assuming some regex is involved with the -games.com suffix. :) · Salvidrim!· ✉ 23:44, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
Why is this site blacklisted? I don't see any reason in the log. I wanted to add some information to an article about Greg Hetson, but I couldn't add references, as dyingscene.com is blacklisted. Nazgul02 ( talk)
It appears this site was blacklisted back in 2010 for sourcing its own articles on Wikipedia. I have personally contacted the owner of the site and was assured they no longer contribute to wikipedia from their own site. Since it's been 3 years, my recommendation would be to unblock them in order to allow our contributors to reference them for articles related to punk music. - Dr.Music —Preceding undated comment added 18:39, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
I understand the desire to avoid links to online petition-gathering sites, as a likely spam source. However, the blanket banning of any URL with the word "petition" in it (as best as I can understand the Regex, it ain't my thing) has been causing false spam flags in multiple articles that I deal with, because they link to legitimate news articles dealing with someone petitioning the court ( example) or to copies of such court petitions ( example). - Nat Gertler ( talk) 02:56, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
\bpetition(?:online|s)?\b
. @
NatGertler: You're correct in your understanding. Also,
JzG (
talk ·
contribs) added what evolved into this filter
here, but I can't find a log entry for it.
Jackmcbarn (
talk)
03:09, 26 August 2013 (UTC)\bpetition(?:online|s24|site|spot|-?them)\.com\b
) so I'm not sure the local one is even necessary. If it is, I agree with DMacks that something like \bpetition(?:online|s)?[A-Za-z0-9]*\.(com|org|net)\b
would prevent a lot of the false positives.
TDL (
talk)
22:31, 26 August 2013 (UTC)This is a website that I have used extensively as a source for the Nike Total 90 and Nike Mercurial Vapor articles. I have no idea whether anyone has used this site to spam Wikipedia in the past, but as you can tell, my intentions with it are purely encyclopaedic. I would appreciate this site being unblocked, since it is one of the leading resources on soccer equipment. – Pee Jay 09:25, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
I am astonished why this site is blocked as spam. This is first time I am trying to link an interesting relevant article reference on an existing page on wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.44.113.253 ( talk • contribs) 06:14, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings. I was tasked with editing an article that has been rejected twice. I need to use academicroom.com as a source but it is blacklisted. I went to the "Spam Blacklist" page ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Spam_blacklist) and it is not listed there. I can't speak for others, but my for own field, which is nanotechnology, Academic Room is a very credible resource, running out of Harvard University. I don't think it serves anyone well to put a blanked ban on it. I therefore request this site be removed from the blacklist. The resources that I need to use can be found in the following hierarchy of the blacklisted site: /physical-sciences/nanotechnology Nanotech-editor ( talk) 21:26, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
I believe www.historyandpolicy.org should be univerally whitelisted. It is an academic research site on UK business, history, and government policy. See, for example, the citation flagged by the spambot on w:Supermarket. I assume there are papers that discuss individual businesses, and this is what fooled the bot. Choor monster ( talk) 17:44, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
I am tempted here to suggest to request whitelisting. It was clearly spammed (and they noted the effects of their spamming - their ranking went up massively, their SEO worked). Defer to Whitelist. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 08:08, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
beacon.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
Beacon Press is a Boston-based independent publisher. I don't know a lot about them, but I understand them to be a legit outfit. A blacklisted-links template popped up in Nancy Gertner today; the article cites the Beacon Press website for Gertner's book in the EL section, which I think is fair. Reviewing [ the history] it appears it was blacklisted in July of 2012 because of 3 abusers with "systematic efforts to promote this publisher and their books." I'm inclined to think that blocking the entire publisher's site isn't the proper scale, and this should be unblocked. But maybe I'm missing the magnitude of the problem, and only the individual books that are not a problem should be whitelisted? Thanks. jhawkinson ( talk) 06:56, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Due to unknown reasons this link is blocked and shows in the Spam Blacklist. Infibeam.com is an authorized Indian e-commerce company. We provide our customers with best deals and make their hectic life easy with the online shopping facility from their homes or offices. Any customer that visits Wikipedia will be able to go to our home site link directly and would not have to face the any problem for searching the link through Wikipedia. We assure that we will abide by the content policies of your sites in the future to avoid any such issues. :) · Rachnarawat· ✉ 05:23, 24 September 2013 GMT + 5:30
Appears to be a legitimiate website with links to KCL. Barney the barney barney ( talk) 20:22, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
This was the incident that triggered the addition of this domain to the spam blacklist. The incident lists a number of examples of link spam - but most are examples for a similar domain, "areacode.org". I can't find any examples of spam for countrycode.org. The two domains are registered to different people, but the websites look very similar, and both link to the same parent organisation "numberingplans.com".
There are 18 pages that reference this website, and it looks like the references were all added before the blacklist (i.e. before June 2010). These pages have all recently been tagged with the "Blacklisted-links" template (which lead me here). Can this domain be unlisted, or should I remove the links from the pages instead? Thanks in advance! Dracunculus ( talk) 19:17, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
bvinewbie.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 Good day. Looked through the information, but I can't see why this guide is on the blacklist. I believe that it contains unique information about the British Virgin Islands, ones that can't be found anywhere else. For example information on immigration and work permits.— Preceding unsigned comment added by John McConvill ( talk • contribs)
I am following up to VRTS ticket # 2013081210002123 sent by a representative of prouty.org, which was blacklisted in August 2011.
The site wasn't blacklisted on the basis of any discussion on this page, but rather based on an ANI discussion (archived here). The blacklisting was apparently done in response to disruption caused by linking to an attack page at www.prouty.org/mcadams/
I know that we don't de-list sites based on requests from people with a conflict of interest, and anyone who monitors this page will know I have declined such requests on many occasions.
However, based on that ANI conversation, it seems that the blacklisting may have been done hastily. The final comment from bureaucrat Infrogmation ( talk · contribs) suggests that this listing should be revisited.
I suggest not de-listing, but modifying the entry to blacklist only that attack page. I would do it myself, but I prefer the transparency of discussion this public page first, rather than back-room OTRS communications. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 22:17, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Not done - I ended up whitelisting the 'about' page instead, which seemed to satisfy the prouty.org representative. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 19:42, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
NORM supplies information that upsets some people. It is a site with foreskin restoration information and is anti-routine male infant circumcision. This means that people have split into entrenched warring camps. This site is likely to have offended someone rather than, itself, being spam. It does have items for sale, yes, but this is not its primary function. Please look at the original reaosn for listing with care and determine if the site is genuinely spammy, with a view to delisting it. Fiddle Faddle 16:59, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Required links have been whitelisted since. Amalthea 10:18, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
NOTE: I've no problem with the way this request has been handled. However, for the record, there is absolutely nothing that makes advocacy sites, per se, ineligible for use as a reliable source. Perhaps Jamie ( Ohnoitsjamie ( talk · contribs)) needs to reread the policy he refers us to, in particular, the WP:BIASED section of WP:RS!! It reads in part, "reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective"! It looks to me like Jamie twice misrepresented policy by indicating that advocacy sites, per se, do not meet WP:RS guidelines - once after having the issue pointed out! (by Eaglizard ( talk · contribs)) I do not like to see administrators, in particular, misrepresent policy like that. -- Elvey ( talk) 19:54, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
I believe that ReverbNation (Alexa ranked 1526 Globally) should be removed from the blacklist.
Also, the editor who blacklisted the site did not log any reason for the entry and has since stated s/he would not oppose de-blacklisting. Jaguar766 ( talk) 22:42, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
I think this site does not deserve to be blacklisted. On the site you can find replacement service for the old MSN Gaming Zone. This should be noted in the MSN Gaming Zone article, but it can't due to the blacklist.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.192.102.20 ( talk • contribs) 09:11, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Not done Wikipedia isn't an advertisement venue for a non-notable website. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:02, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
abseits-soccer is a website that contains info on German football and is widely used by
WP:FOOTY. The trigger is apparently \bsoccer\.com\b
. Cannot see a reason why abseits-soccer would be blocked for spam, so I believe this is a case of a false positive. Additionally, this entry is from April 2012, but has no reasoning given in the
log. --
Madcynic (
talk)
14:21, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
(?<=//|\.)soccer\.com\b
to fix the same problem as happened at
#Hyphenated domain being misinterpreted?.
Jackmcbarn (
talk)
14:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
It do offer some great tips and solutions for guys like me, so I just think this site is not deserved to blacklisted.
In conclusion we request immediate removal of TheWebMiner from the wikipedia blacklist and its return to the web scraping search page on the site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.85.0.97 ( talk) 15:34, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
i want to state at first that i am not in connection to the website administrators although i use it for personal extractions that are required in my field of activity, which is marketing. I also want to be clear that my extractions are relatively small so i don't pay any money for that service and i was not asked to do this request. I simply think that thewebminer is a very efficient tool for extractions. At first i've come to it browsing through Wikipedia and this is how i usually got to it, until the site was removed. I was curious about the removal so this is how i found out about the wikipedia blacklisting. I am only writing to you because i want you to reconsider the denial of the delisting and to take into consideration the fact that the web miner is a very popular tool within marketing companies like mine and it should have a place into wikipedia as it is extremely relevant to the web scraping topic. Laura Stein — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ady1689 ( talk • contribs) 01:55, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
i want to state at first that i am not in connection to the website administrators although i use it for personal extractions that are required in my field of activity, which is marketing. I also want to be clear that my extractions are relatively small so i don't pay any money for that service and i was not asked to do this request. I simply think that thewebminer is a very efficient tool for extractions. At first i've come to it browsing through Wikipedia and this is how i usually got to it, until the site was removed. I was curious about the removal so this is how i found out about the wikipedia blacklisting. I am only writing to you because i want you to reconsider the denial of the delisting and to take into consideration the fact that the web miner is a very popular tool within marketing companies like mine and it should have a place into wikipedia as it is extremely relevant to the web scraping topic. Laura Stein — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ady1689 ( talk • contribs) 01:55, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
style="overflow:auto...
is recognized as a SPAM site/link; style="width:...;overflow:auto...
isn't. –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
08:19, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm trying to troubleshoot an issue reported via OTRS where a person tried to add a link to one of the Requested Articles sections (their personal website). The domain has a pattern like so: www.<name>-actor.com
. I tried several combinations (e.g., myteethhurt-actor.com and foobar-actor.com and it seems the issue is the -actor
bit. The domain in question is not on either the local or global blacklists, and I can't find a pattern in either that would match "-actor" exactly. Should I request an exception or just ask the person to omit the link or is this something that we should fix? §
FreeRangeFrog
croak
21:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
\bactor(?:suriya|arya)?\.com\b
from meta added on
23:39, 28 November 2009 the user was optimizing several regex and goofed. The correct regex should be \bactor(suriya|arya)\.com\b
Werieth (
talk)
22:52, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
The entry for "\bstay[\w-]*\.co\.uk\b" was added on 12 April 2011 in response to this request. However, this rule is overly broad (it seems to catch any domain starting "stay" and ending ".co.uk"). This is causing problems with the link to www.staysure.co.uk on Sunday Times Fast Track 100. Could this rule be removed or rewritten to be more specific to the domains mentioned in the original request? Thank you. – PartTimeGnome ( talk | contribs) 17:16, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
At Meta, another user reported concern about blacklisting of jesus-passion.com. Existing links to this domain cannot be edited. The user was told that this domain is not blacklisted at meta, so it must be a local listing here. I don't see jesus-passion on the EN blacklist, but passion.com is there. Has the blacklisting of passion.com been extended to include the hyphenated form? If so, how can this be fixed? -- Orlady ( talk) 17:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
The problem is, that we have to take into account the possibility tha the rule maybe wanted to catch all possible instances of '<blah>-passion.com'. There are those typical domain ending (recently it was 'blahblahfacts.com', a large set of links all ending in 'facts.com'). I'd go for the whitelist here, for jesus-passion.ciom, keeps the already difficult regexes just a bit easier to read for those whose links are blocked.
I will have a look at what the passion rule was supposed to catch. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 03:47, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
The spammed link was indeed passion.com itself (see COIBot reports linked from the tracking, and follow 'tracked' in there to see the spamming cases). I have adapted the rule according to the suggestion by Jackmcbarn, http://www.jesus-passion.com should now be linkable. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 07:25, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
On meta, we use the gadget User:Erwin/SBHandler ( m:MediaWiki:Gadget-SBHandler.js) to add items to the blacklist on meta. It works from the Spam-blacklist talkpage ( m:Talk:Spam blacklist), and from the cross-wiki reports generated by COIBot (' m:User:COIBot/XWiki/example.org'). I think that this tool could also be handy here on en.wikipedia, knowing that we have here also the talkpage of the blacklist ('here'), and the local reports (' Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/Local/example.org') where this could be enabled.
Would there be interest to have this tool here, and people who are capable/interested to move the gadget here (I tried to hack and activate it through my local .js, but I could not get it to work)?
(Not willingly wanting to complicate things .. but one could consider to expand the tool to also work on XLinkBot's revertlist - being capable to blacklist from there, or to revertlist from here). -- Dirk Beetstra T C 12:32, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Returning to check something that I'd reported at the start of July (because the spammer is still going), it looks like none of the proposed additions have been processed this month - the only additions to the blacklist have been from admins adding URLs directly. Is there a reason why these aren't being processed? -- McGeddon ( talk) 09:48, 29 July 2013 (UTC)