This is spam website with no, absolutely no connection or relevance to arlington cemetery, arlington national cemetery, or any other such cemetery. Links in WP to this website have been removed, Still, I request a block IOT avoid future spamming via WP. –
S. Rich (
talk)
02:49, 26 October 2022 (UTC)reply
The current owner of the domain has no connection to Arlington cemetery - and they disclose that on their 'About us' page. But indeed, their content is for the most part unrelated to Arlington, primarily dealing with drug abuse and PTSD among veterans (though even that is only minimally covered in a direct fashion).
The problem however is that the former holder of the domain did cover significant information related to Arlington cemetary and those interred there. Nearly all of the links that have been removed so far have included the direct archive pointers to archive.org, where the original articles are, providing that fully relevant information.
I took the liberty of reverting most (possibly all) of the removals that were performed, because they removed important sourcing for information in the articles.
I would strongly argue against putting in place a block on use of the domain, because of the archived content that is relevant.
That said, I do wish there was a better way of displaying the reference information, so that people would simply not have the opportunity to click on the wrong one of the two links provided. As well, the default wording is confusing, showing a hyperlink entitled "The original" for what is not the original, but in fact the current site. This needs correction as well. I'm not sure if it's incorrect application of the template by previous editors or some other issue - but I will investigate.
Filter
554 is used to block spammy refs, matching the above regex. Pretty much the only disallow filter for sources, and not subject to community discussion, so probably shouldn't be a filter. Should be moved to the spam blacklist.
ProcrastinatingReader (
talk)
11:53, 8 December 2021 (UTC)reply
@
ProcrastinatingReader: I split the regex into 5 domain regexes and tried to find some actual links as examples. Can you point me to examples for charly1300 and mickeycharts? (I just want to see whether we should immediately up this to XWiki. --
Dirk BeetstraTC12:19, 8 December 2021 (UTC)reply
I posted the above here before but it seemingly ended without action. I'm going to disable 554 (
hist·log) momentarily - re-making this request so an admin can add these URLs to the spam blacklist as necessary.
ProcrastinatingReader (
talk)
11:36, 23 October 2022 (UTC)reply
If you have the {{BLRequestRegex}} then the handler takes those regexes literally. It only adds \b around the domains/links, and escapes the needed characters, in {{LinkSummary}}/{{BLRequestLinks}}. If you want to blacklist '\bmickeycharts\b', you have to request that regex, not 'mickeycharts'. It depends sometimes whether you really want to use or even need the \b's.
Dirk BeetstraTC10:20, 27 October 2022 (UTC)reply
This is spam website with no, absolutely no connection or relevance to arlington cemetery, arlington national cemetery, or any other such cemetery. Links in WP to this website have been removed, Still, I request a block IOT avoid future spamming via WP. –
S. Rich (
talk)
02:49, 26 October 2022 (UTC)reply
The current owner of the domain has no connection to Arlington cemetery - and they disclose that on their 'About us' page. But indeed, their content is for the most part unrelated to Arlington, primarily dealing with drug abuse and PTSD among veterans (though even that is only minimally covered in a direct fashion).
The problem however is that the former holder of the domain did cover significant information related to Arlington cemetary and those interred there. Nearly all of the links that have been removed so far have included the direct archive pointers to archive.org, where the original articles are, providing that fully relevant information.
I took the liberty of reverting most (possibly all) of the removals that were performed, because they removed important sourcing for information in the articles.
I would strongly argue against putting in place a block on use of the domain, because of the archived content that is relevant.
That said, I do wish there was a better way of displaying the reference information, so that people would simply not have the opportunity to click on the wrong one of the two links provided. As well, the default wording is confusing, showing a hyperlink entitled "The original" for what is not the original, but in fact the current site. This needs correction as well. I'm not sure if it's incorrect application of the template by previous editors or some other issue - but I will investigate.
Filter
554 is used to block spammy refs, matching the above regex. Pretty much the only disallow filter for sources, and not subject to community discussion, so probably shouldn't be a filter. Should be moved to the spam blacklist.
ProcrastinatingReader (
talk)
11:53, 8 December 2021 (UTC)reply
@
ProcrastinatingReader: I split the regex into 5 domain regexes and tried to find some actual links as examples. Can you point me to examples for charly1300 and mickeycharts? (I just want to see whether we should immediately up this to XWiki. --
Dirk BeetstraTC12:19, 8 December 2021 (UTC)reply
I posted the above here before but it seemingly ended without action. I'm going to disable 554 (
hist·log) momentarily - re-making this request so an admin can add these URLs to the spam blacklist as necessary.
ProcrastinatingReader (
talk)
11:36, 23 October 2022 (UTC)reply
If you have the {{BLRequestRegex}} then the handler takes those regexes literally. It only adds \b around the domains/links, and escapes the needed characters, in {{LinkSummary}}/{{BLRequestLinks}}. If you want to blacklist '\bmickeycharts\b', you have to request that regex, not 'mickeycharts'. It depends sometimes whether you really want to use or even need the \b's.
Dirk BeetstraTC10:20, 27 October 2022 (UTC)reply