MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/February 2011

=Proposed additions=

carmarthenrfc.co.uk


I'm not sure what the deal is here as I became aware of it via the COI page, there are persistent efforts to replace the official website of Carmarthen Quins RFC which is carmarthenquinsrfc.co.uk with the similar sounding carmarthenrfc.co.uk. Blacklisting the site would solve the problem and prevent constant protecting and reverting. --Cameron Scott (talk) 11:21, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest holding off on this. This link has apparently been the official site (verifiably so) for some eight years, without any apparent change in registration, and it may get restored at some point. There is also little evidence that the other site has replaced it as the official site. The page is currently semi'd, and I've removed both links for these reasons. -- zzuuzz (talk) 12:02, 2 October 2010 (UTC)


 * OK, I've left you a message on your talkpage - this is all a bit puzzling. --Cameron Scott (talk) 12:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

trunkarchive.com


PhotoFan76's contributions consist almost exclusively of creating new biographical articles for photographers whose sole common feature is that they are all represented by the media-licensing company http:// trunkarchive.com; each article includes a link to a page from this site. I note that the account has made similar edits, as has  and wonder if this is either a concerted promotional effort or some socking. -- Rrburke (talk) 01:34, 7 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Trunk Archive -- previously deleted as blatant spam
 * . Given all the notices they've failed to heed, I see no other way to keep this company from continuing to abuse Wikipedia for their own marketing purposes.
 * Trusted, established editors who see an application for these links as a reliable source for some article can always request whitelisting of specific pages at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist.
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:26, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * . Given all the notices they've failed to heed, I see no other way to keep this company from continuing to abuse Wikipedia for their own marketing purposes.
 * Trusted, established editors who see an application for these links as a reliable source for some article can always request whitelisting of specific pages at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist.
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:26, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Trusted, established editors who see an application for these links as a reliable source for some article can always request whitelisting of specific pages at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist.
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:26, 14 August 2010 (UTC)


 * This still leaves 40+ potentially spammy articles to review for notability, conflict of interest and neutrality:


 * Achim Lippoth
 * Alex Cayley -- speedied 15/08/10 --RrB
 * Andrew Bettles -- speedied 15/08/10 --RrB
 * Anne Menke
 * Bela Borsodi
 * Bruno Dayan -- speedied 15/08/10 --RrB
 * Chris Craymer
 * Coppi Barbieri -- speedied 15/08/10 --RrB
 * Doug Inglish
 * Emma Summerton
 * Enrique Badulescu -- speedied 15/08/10 --RrB
 * Eric Frideen
 * Fabio Chizzola
 * François Halard
 * Frédéric Lagrange
 * Graeme Montgomery (photographer)
 * Greg Kadel
 * Horacio Salinas (photographer) -- speedied 21/08/10 --RrB
 * Jason Schmidt (photographer)
 * John Akehurst
 * John Clang
 * Kutlu -- sent to AfD Hoary (talk) 12:46, 14 November 2010 (UTC) Deleted via this AfD Hoary (talk) 13:30, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Marc Hom
 * Martyn Thompson
 * Matt Jones (photographer)
 * Matthew Brookes -- speedied 15/08/10 --RrB
 * Melodie McDaniel
 * Neil Stewart
 * Pamela Hanson
 * Patric Shaw -- tagged WP:CSD, WP:CSD 21/08/10 --RrB
 * Robin Derrick
 * Ronny Jaques
 * Simon Emmett
 * Simon Watson (photographer)
 * Steve Hiett -- speedied 15/08/10 --RrB
 * Straulino -- tagged WP:CSD 16/08/10 --RrB speedy declined. Tagged for notability, COI / sent to AfD Hoary (talk) 15:32, 13 November 2010 (UTC) Deleted via this AfD Hoary (talk) 23:48, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Susanna Howe -- speedied 21/08/10 --RrB
 * The Collective Shift
 * Tim Barber
 * Toby McFarlan Pond -- tagged WP:CSD 16/08/10 --RrB speedy declined. Tagged for notability, COI
 * Trunk Archive -- tagged WP:CSD 16/08/10 --RrB speedy declined
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:33, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Update on the above: I've left notes on the above 41 articles' talk pages but the articles themselves still need to be checked and tagged with coi, notability and, in some cases, maybe copyvio. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:02, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You were very energetic in chasing up this spammer, for which I thank you, but the spammer's own article lacked a notice till I added it just now. -- Hoary (talk) 15:32, 13 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Here's a list of articles previously deleted by others:
 * Brigitte Lacombe -- earlier version was deleted as a copyright violation
 * Carlotta Manaigo
 * Carlton Davis
 * David Slijper
 * Derek Kettela
 * Eric Traore (photographer)
 * Igor Borisov (current article is about a Russian athlete, not a photographer)
 * Jan Welters
 * Josh Olins
 * Lorenzo Bringheli
 * Martien Mulder
 * Michael Baumgarten (photographer)
 * Nikolas Koenig
 * Rennio Maifredi
 * Sasha Eisenman
 * Many of the deleted articles had copyright issues; the list of 40+ still-existing articles above should also be checked for copyright issues.
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:02, 14 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Other pages edited by one or more of the spammers; these should be checked for problems:
 * Bruce Weber (photographer)
 * Clang (photographer) -- later a redirect to John Clang (listed above)
 * Clive Arrowsmith
 * Denis Piel
 * Elaine Constantine
 * Fabbio Chizzola
 * Francesco Carrozzini
 * Guy Aroch
 * Harry Peccinotti
 * Hedi Slimane
 * Inez van Lamsweerde and Vinoodh Matadin
 * Jean Pigozzi
 * Jerry Schatzberg
 * Jock Sturges
 * John C.L. Ang -- later a redirect to John Clang (listed above)
 * John Getz
 * Kayt Jones
 * Mary Ellen Mark
 * Matthew Brooks
 * Max Vadukul
 * Mike Potter (makeup artist)
 * Nick Knight (photographer)
 * Norbert Schoerner
 * Philip-Lorca diCorcia
 * Rankin (photographer)
 * Raymond Meier (photographer)
 * Roxanne Lowit
 * Terry Richardson
 * Tierney Gearon
 * Walter Chin
 * Yelena Yemchuk
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:48, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

ad-sense 9574247032165131

 * links


 * also added by same users


 * prior reports
 * archived report: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2010 Archive Aug 1
 * current report: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam (static perma-link)

Slow-moving spamming to multiple articles by SPA accounts. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 06:12, 3 September 2010 (UTC)


 * This is now going cross-wiki with yet another domain.
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 14:19, 27 September 2010 (UTC)


 * There are dozens more domains and at least one more prior report:
 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2010 Archive Feb 1
 * I'll see what COIBot finds then take it from there. -- A. B. (talk • contribs)


 * 76 more domains; I have a feeling this is still not all of it:


 * 27 more accounts:


 * Deleted spam pages:
 * Dynamictrucksonline.com
 * Maniyattu family
 * User:Fightobesity
 * User:Getrichslowly
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 00:40, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * 40 related domains registered to Incept Media in Norcross, Georgia, USA
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

prlog.org


A "do-it-yourself" press release site that states "Issuers of the press releases are solely responsible for the content of their press releases. PRLog.Org can't be held liable for the contents of the press releases.". This came to my attention due to a disaffected person posting a link to www.prlog.org/10920757-wikipedia-may-face-criminal-charges-for-its-racial-attacks.html, used as an external attack page, but a review of other content on the site shows a great deal of spam advertising framed as "press releases". This is linked over 600 times on English Wikipedia, mostly in mainspace, and a review showed that almost none of the mainspace links is useful. One exception should be whitelisted if the main site is blacklisted: www.prlog.org/10046797-internet-group-anonymous-declares-war-on-scientology.pdf is used as a reference for several articles related to Scientology and Project Chanology. Otherwise, it's unlikely to be an appropriate link. — Gavia immer (talk) 01:03, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Normally blacklisting is done in the case of ongoing abuse that can't be managed through other tools. As there's no documented abuse outside of the one page at the site by a signle user, I think this should be discussed more first - possibly at WP:ELN or similar discussion forum. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 03:15, 11 September 2010 (UTC)


 * We have >600 of these pages and many are inappropriate even if not spammed; I wonder if we should give this domain to XLinkBot to watch? -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 22:42, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that XLinkBot is a good option for now. My concern with blacklisting immediately was the lack of documentation of abuse ... but as more is learned, it may be good to re-visit the blacklisting option again in the future. --- Barek (talk) - 15:56, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

slideshare.net


Site hosting user-created powerpoint-type slideshows. Used on WP sometimes as sources, creating WP:SPS, WP:RS problems; more commonly used for ELs, where the problem is WP:ELNO, subheads 1,4 & 8 -- but, more importantly, 11: "Links to blogs, personal web pages..." The overarching problem is WP:SOAP, as users appears principally to be linking to the site as a way to feature their own self-created content. Currently ~500 ELs; have started cleanup.

Presumably should be whitelisted for SlideShare, Slide hosting service. -- Rrburke (talk) 01:50, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

moviewood.net
... sigh MER-C 07:02, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Rajat Tokas spam war


MER-C 09:18, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

canuckistanmusic.com
As far as "diffs" just look at most edits made by 99.232.46.74. Also note Canuckistan Music. It's spam. 216.185.5.2 (talk) 15:08, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Transformers


All of the articles related to the Transformers features links to fansites as sources, which have be established as unreliable sources. When it is pointed out as such editors agree but will in turn re place them or put them in articles that they think are not being watched. When anybody tries to remove them everybody cries foul insisting that they are reliable. Here are a list of such sites:


 * [www.tfw2005.com/ Transformers World 2005]
 * [tfkenkon.com/ TF Kenton]
 * [tformers.com/ TFormers]
 * [www.toyarchive.com/ Alex Bickmore's Super Toy Archive]
 * [www.tfu.info/ TFU.Info]
 * [www.unicron.com/ Unicron.com]
 * [www.spektakle.com/ A fan's art portfolio]
 * [www.transformertoys.co.uk/ Transformers at the Moon]
 * [www.seibertron.com/ Seibertron]

I feel that blacklisting is the only way to properly combat this. I mean for every editor or IP you deal with on the matter, another appears insisting reliability. Sarujo (talk) 02:49, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I've experienced the same thing in relation to WikiProject: Video games Transformers articles. None of these sites have any editorial process nor professional staff.  Information is typically presented in a non-professional manner.  I would Support blacklisting the bunch, as it seems the Transformers community largely ignores WP:RS in respect to these sites. --Teancum (talk) 04:49, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

instantmedigap.com


Several attempts to spam the medigap article. No legitimate reason to ever link to such a commercial site. --Cyber cobra (talk) 20:27, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

paulwesley.ya.st
A fansite of Paul Wesley, in Spanish. Over the last few weeks several IPs from Spain have been persistently adding a link to this fansite to the infobox in Paul Wesley. Temporary semi-protection did not help. I think blacklisting the site would be a preferable option to permanent/long-term semi-protection of the article, so I am bringing it here. Nsk92 (talk) 05:59, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

haihoi.com


MER-C 04:50, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

blackberryimeiunlockcodes.com
-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:43, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

MER-C 10:47, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

professortravel-egypt.com
-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:45, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

bitbitbite.com


Professional newspapers/review sites on mostly music-related articles have been replaced with bitbitbite.com, which is a blog hosted on tumblr, which should never be used as a reliable source. IP 66.108.98.139 has been blocked for spamming, but has threatened on own talk page to continue and evade block. Yves (talk) 22:29, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Additionally, "Roman's Revenge" has been spammed four times today by three different IPs with the website. Yves (talk) 00:55, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Five times now, by four different IPs. Yves (talk) 01:28, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. It has been used before multiple times. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  02:19, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

pacbi.com
Impostor/attack website, the real website of the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel is www.pacbi.org. (Recently added to the article by a sockpuppeteer.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 10:50, 17 November 2010 (UTC) Mike Rosoft (talk) 18:19, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Add to that (see the history of Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel):

oldstratforduponavon.com
Today I removed nearly 50 instances of this spam site. It contains many pages with scans of old postcards. Some are obviously copyright free due to their age, but others are probably dubious. It could be argued that this site should not be linked therefore because of WP:ELNEVER, but my main beef is that it makes money selling reprints of the postcards. Such a money making wheeze has no place on Wikipedia and should be blocked. --Simple Bob (talk) 21:52, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

strollingguides.co.uk
Travel site spammed on 40+ articles. Wikipedia is not a travel guide and any such information should be directed to Wikitravel rather than spam sites like this containing copyright text and photographs. --Simple Bob (talk) 22:11, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

jinglestop.com / reklammuzik.com


User:212.146.130.28 spent five months doing nothing but periodically adding these two non-English commercial URLs to the Jingle article as "examples", and reverting any editor who removed them. Within an hour of that IP being banned, a new IP (User:88.250.170.69) popped up to spam the same URLs, and a similar IP has just added both of them again.

Given that these links clearly fail WP:LINKSTOAVOID for being commercial sites, and are presently unlikely to be relevant to any article other than Jingle, I think it's probably time to blacklist them. --McGeddon (talk) 18:58, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Two years of Transmetron (Utah) spam on Wikipedia

 * Spam domains:


 * Spam accounts:
 * Non-portable IP address
 * Non-portable IP address




 * Related domains:
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL
 * Already caught by blacklist possibly due to "hyrdocodone" in the URL


 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 

-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:11, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Spam articles:
 * OrAlert
 * How to use a drug test

winedetail.com
-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:07, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Google Search Cache with IP
http:\/\/(25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|[01]?[0-9][0-9]?)\.(25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|[01]?[0-9][0-9]?)\.(25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|[01]?[0-9][0-9]?)\.(25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|[01]?[0-9][0-9]?)/search?q=cache

The bane of my recent wiki work is dealing with hundreds if not thousands of IP urls, that have broken. Google regularly changes its server IPs and causes all links to the previous IP to break. I would suggest blacklisting the whole of Google search cache due to the fact that it dies very rapidly. (within 60 days) and makes following up on these links not possible due to the fact that if you query more than a handful of these at a time Google automatically blacklists your IP address from looking up any further information. Given the very short nature of the link and the fact that Google prevents maintenance of these links, and the fact that these links should be pointing to one of three locations that work a hell of a lot better (original source, archive.org, or webcitation.org) These links just cause definitive link rot and break references on articles. ΔT The only constant 23:14, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

ecoseed.org
There have been a lot of recent EL postings and new references added by certain users whose main contribution is press releases published by ecoseed.org. Even if these are more or less on topic (though sometimes it's quite a stretch), they usually link to promotional POV blurbs written by interested commercial parties about new products and projects. It appears to me that these contributions do a lot for ecoseed.org in bringing them eyeballs and do little or nothing for Wikipedia.

There are currently about 15 links to ecoseed.org, most of which are sourcing article content and are marginally ok but not critical to the project. Many ELs to ecoseed.org have been reverted because they were tangential, promotional, or current events rather than notable sources.

Here are a couple of users whose contributions are almost entirely ecoseed.org links: 210.213.136.98 and Ashleymendizabal (possibly the same editor since edit histories barely overlap). Joja lozzo  04:17, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

visendo.com


NN company whose employees have been creating multiple spam articles - see User talk:Dragos Mann, User talk:Visendoteam, User talk:Dumian -- andy (talk) 10:41, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Wilde Technologies spam
Spam domains:

Related domains:

Possibly related domains (SEO clients?):
 * Don't blacklist for now

-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 05:10, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

happywarrior.org
-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:46, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

netlawman spam
Spam domains:

Spam accounts:

Spam article: -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * NetLawMan

footballcardgallery.com
. I haven't fully purged this domain yet, but COIBot shows the vast majority of links to this site were added by a very narrow IP range. However, the anti-spam effort has moved on. MER-C 09:35, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

notaryexam.org
This site has been added to the notary public article 27 & 28 October, 4 November and 9 December. The site is basically a tease; nothing useful is revealed unless you order their services, and the implication is given that one needs to buy their exam prep materials even for states that don't have any exam. It has no value to Wikipedia. I believe that preventing linking to this site is a better solution than preventing all edits by IP editors to the Notary Public article, and a better solution than the range block to prevent edits by a single sockmaster. Jc3s5h (talk) 03:33, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

jitbit.com and perfect-macro-recorder.com





 * Jitbit has been spammed for over four years now, with the spammers getting very persistent recently from what appears to be dynamic ips. Some of these recent spammers, along with others, have been including perfect-macro-recorder.com in their spamming. --Ronz (talk) 03:33, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

fret12.com


MER-C 12:49, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

sidebarnation.com
Long history (going back years) of spamming this blog/podcast by (now blocked) and possibly others. User has been so persistent and unrepentant that I doubt blocking alone is going to stop them. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  13:32, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:09, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

khatanasearchengine.blogspot.com
Blacklist evasion: redirects to blacklisted domain



MER-C 12:24, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * ✅. Added a wildcard so khatana*.blogspot.com will be blacklisted. ~Amatulić (talk) 01:35, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Taj Pharmaceuticals
I think the material at User:Deli nk/Taj spam campaign sums things up pretty well, as well as the sockpuppet investigations. I'll include some link summaries, but this is my first time posting something here, please let me know if more is needed. TN X Man 16:35, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * ✅. Looks like a really concerted effort to promote that company. ~Amatulić (talk) 02:17, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

raregroove2mp3.com


Persistent re-addition of commercial link to by  despite repeated explanation that we do not link to such sites which sell MP3s. She is on a level4 warning now, which probably should have been issued earlier as I think several attempted re-insertions disguised as a reference were missed. The user has repeatedly removed the previous warning levels from her talk page. Yworo (talk) 20:25, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * - blacklist is for active abuse that cannot be stopped by other means. The adding of the link appears to have stopped over a week ago.  Can re-submit if it begins again. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:27, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

wallpapersbikini.com


Over a dozen articles have now been spammed with links to this site (here is an example]). Over the past few days I've seen other articles spammed with the site as well, but I didn't keep track of them. It's a different IP/account each time so blacklisting the site seems best.  Mbinebri  talk ← 17:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC)


 * If it matters, the link has been added to numerous new articles since Dec. 30. For example, here and here.    Mbinebri   talk ← 21:11, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:17, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

grandtheft5.ucoz.com



 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grand_Theft_Auto_%28series%29&diff=prev&oldid=402855147
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grand_Theft_Auto_%28series%29&diff=402507380&oldid=402489085
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grand_Theft_Auto_%28series%29&diff=402477475&oldid=402330791
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grand_Theft_Auto_%28series%29&diff=402270888&oldid=402134465
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grand_Theft_Auto_%28series%29&diff=402115780&oldid=401934798
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grand_Theft_Auto_%28series%29&diff=401908815&oldid=401908689
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grand_Theft_Auto_%28series%29&diff=401756543&oldid=401753927
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grand_Theft_Auto_%28series%29&diff=406236295&oldid=406026642
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grand_Theft_Auto_%28series%29&diff=402855147&oldid=402848147

IP user persistently removing reliable reference and switching it to link to this fansite which has no established reliability. Article has been protected, user resumes activity after protection expires. - X201 (talk) 10:20, 6 January 2011 (UTC)


 * ✅ --Dirk Beetstra T  C 10:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

pieclub.org.uk


All of users edits have been to add link to Mince pie:, , , ,. Now edit warring to revert removal. Warned re spam and edit warring on talk page. JoeSperrazza (talk) 02:10, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * . One user repeatedly adding the same link to the same article doesn't really justify blacklisting the site, especially since the user appears to have given up after being blocked for a day. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:45, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

worldlingo.com/ma/enwiki
Mirror of Wikipedia, no legitimate use. Fences &  Windows  22:56, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Similarly, enotes.com/topic is all Wikipedia mirrors and needs blocking. Fences  &  Windows  22:24, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Are these being actively spammed? Which user accounts are involved?  Having no legitimate use isn't reason in itself to blacklist. --- Barek (talk) - 22:40, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Are these being actively spammed? Which user accounts are involved?  Having no legitimate use isn't reason in itself to blacklist. --- Barek (talk) - 22:40, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

marrakech-loisirs.com


MER-C 12:28, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * by Hu12. MER-C 02:35, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

virtualflyguides.blogspot.com
-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:47, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * for now. Looks like it was spammed by one user, who is indef blocked. No spamming activity since then. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:19, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

=Proposed removals=

PontiacOwners.org
Site was just started by a friend of mine, It is essentially just a pontiac owners message board to discuss pontiac vehicles. No reason to be on a blacklist, just your average everyday message board like forever pontiac and GM inside news also listed under the external links for Pontiac —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.167.106.170 (talk • contribs) 16:17, 2010 November 14


 * ❌ All of  was blacklisted per this request, and will not be removed from the blacklist, since unofficial forums almost never meet our policy on external links and there were many such additions. In particular, a forum "that was just started" surely does not add value to the article. Also, the Pontiac article had a large number of links on it that violated the link policy, which is not a reason to add more links that do so. I've cleaned it up a bit. You might consider submitting the forum to the Open Directory Project, which is one of the links remaining in the Pontiac external links section and would be accessible from there if they accept it. — Gavia immer (talk) 20:45, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

eutimes.com
Why was this blacklisted based on one random users one random dislike of one article that appeared to be an op-ed? Yes it appears perhaps a bit right wing but if that were a criteria we'd blacklist half the Murdoch trash from Fox to the The Sun. Merrill Stubing (talk) 18:50, 24 December 2010 (UTC)


 * . If you look at the report you reference, it contains many instances of linkspamming by multiple anonymous IP addresses who appeared to be intent on pushing a POV. Also, if it doesn't qualify as a WP:RS, then there's no reason to have links to it. ~Amatulić (talk) 06:46, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

vkontakte.ru
Why the biggest Russian/Ukrainian social network is blocked? For instance, facebook.com is not blocked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arturyatsko (talk • contribs) 05:45, 15 December 2010 (UTC)


 * What would be the purpose of including links to any social network? ~Amatulić (talk) 00:14, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * For example, to indicate contacts in the private page. Русские идут! (talk) 16:37, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * This link was the subject of referral spam by an unmanageable amount of IPs. See here and here. Like Amatulic said, I don't see why this link should be on articles other than Vkontakte, and if there are any exceptions they can be whitelisted.  Them From  Space  03:50, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * So add Facebook to the blacklist, because it isn't needed. Русские идут! (talk) 16:37, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Why, well:



Massively abused by a large number of editors (example diff, many warnings ignored (one example: User talk:195.238.112.36 - note the edits - plain spamming), etc. etc. Soon after blacklisting, they switched to vkontakte.ru (according to diff).  Links are not included by pushing them inappropriately (and as a matter of fact, many facebook links, which are NOT pushed inappropriately, are removed, we even have a bot doing that for us), but because links are useful here and there.  That may be true for vk.com/vkontakte.ru, but since spamming these links seemed to be the chosen way of getting it linked, blacklisting the spammed domains is the only solution.  Moreover, this is a Russian, not an English site, and though I can imagine that there are some appropriate, by far the most will not be appropriate anyway, as they will be in Russian (more note, this was even blacklisted (but not anymore) on the Russian Wikipedia diff/diff/diff - still some rules remain on ru.wikipedia, see ru:MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist - if they think that this site is abused in such a way that they need to resort to blacklisting parts ..).

If there are places where these links are of interest, then I would suggest to whitelist those. In line with the others who evaluated this, &  (for specific links). --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:52, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

www.myretrotv.com/affiliates.html
Tried to add a ref link for the above to WPVN-CA. It comes up as blocked by SPAM. Could this affiliates list page be unblocked? Andyross (talk) 13:46, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * to request unblocking of a specific page on a site. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:51, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I wonder why the site is blocked in the first place? It's just a TV network. Andyross (talk) 20:09, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * will tell you why. Stifle (talk) 12:03, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

opposingviews.com
Mysteriously blocked while i was trying to make a minor edit, resulting in the whole page being unable to be displayed properly. It would really be helpful to view a WHY a particular site would be blocked. Opposingviews is a political discussion site, which lists on-record statements of individuals/ groups on both sides of a particular issue(s). I dont see how it could be spam.Yonskii (talk) 16:33, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * . Looking through a bunch of pages on that site, it appears the content is either (a) user-generated responses to statements, failing WP:RS and is inappropriate for linking, or (b) a collection of links to views of notable "experts" (such as organizations with some agenda), in which case it is inappropriate for linking because it's preferable to link directly to specific pages published by those organizations. ~Amatulić (talk) 06:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

cookdandbombd.co.uk
Went to add this to the Chris Morris page earlier. Looking at the talk page and history, it seems to be on the blacklist because of one anon's attempts to add it a couple of times before, with ... less-than-diplomatic ... attempts to justify it. But taking another look at the site itself, I think it probably does get by as an external link on the page, as (in addition to the fannish stuff of course) it seems to be a repository of some reasonably interesting content that can't be found elsewhere on the web, which should complement our article well enough. It's had some play in The Guardian and elsewhere, so it's not exactly unknown, but as ever I'll leave it up others to decide. :-) Steve  T • C 22:28, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Tried to add a link to the People Vs Jerry Sadowitz talk page with a view to using some of it's info to create a new section. I'm clueless as to why it may have been banned. Any ideas Weavehole (talk) 10:47, 17 December 2010 (UTC)weavehole


 * if you want to add a link to a specific page. Looks like it was spammed a number of times, particularly links to its forums. See WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/cookdandbombd.co.uk. ~Amatulić (talk) 05:55, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

acopiancenter.am


Spammed by IPs, User:Boajeff, and a presumed sockpuppet. However, I think the blocking of this website was excessive, done without considering the utility of the site and without informing the spammers of Wikipedia's spam and external links. The website contains an online copy of a perfectly reliable reference, A Field Guide to the Birds of Armenia, and other parts could be useful external links at articles on birds and the environment in Armenia. Discussed at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Birds. —innotata 19:52, 18 December 2010 (UTC)


 * for linking specific pages, specifically those with the pattern which should allow links to the online field guide and nothing else. I don't see any other pages on that site as appropriate for linking. In fact, I may experiment with that myself when I get a chance.


 * I observe that it looks like the sockpuppet has solicited your help in getting this link restored. Due to the history of spamming (apparently for the purpose of promoting and selling field guides), this site should stay in the blacklist. Remember, citations do not need to be linkable. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:58, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * ✅! I added the above pattern to the whitelist and tested it on my user page. Looks like it worked; I can link to pages in the field guide but no other links to acopiancenter.am are permitted. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:11, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

whatbird.com

 * This is a perfectly good site, so I don't think it should be on the blacklist. There are several pages which could be very useful. — focus 04:11, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The site was blacklisted because of paid spamming. I recommend having specific pages whitelisted, such requests will be looked at favourably. MER-C 07:10, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * . I see no pages on the site's 'www' subdomain that are suitable for linking. Much of the site advertises products or contains information about products that you are expected to buy from them. Several articles are "how to" articles; see WP:NOTHOWTO. The articles that might be useful are attributed to some other source such as ezinearticles.com — it would be better to link to the actual source, not a site that recycles information from other places.
 * The sub-domain 'identify', on the other hand, may be useful to whitelist, specifically the pattern identify\.whatbird.com/obj/.* although those pages are littered with advertising. However, that subdomain does contain specific information about specific birds. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:11, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

eutimes.com
It has a pretty good news article:  that I wanted to post on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red-winged_Blackbird It is relevant and timely. also, I messed up writing the link, so the url is there, it's just not clickable. someone (me?) should either remove the url, or add the "url=" tag, so it can be clicked. i tried the second option, and was obviously denied. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jehan60188 (talk • contribs) 22:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Jehan60188, I've added a comment to Talk:Beebe,_Arkansas regarding the credibility of eutimes.com. Plus it's already been proposed and rejected for removal from the blacklist a few days ago (see earlier entry in this list).--Leigh (talk) 01:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Stifle (talk) 14:46, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

learn-melanau.co.cc
I humbly request that the above website be removed from the blacklist. This website discusses about melanau culture and teach about melanau language. Hence it is very useful since the information about this topic is hard to find online. I hope that other readers will find this website useful hence I would like to include it in the page.

I would like to put it in this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaul_festival Thanks for your consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tokbat (talk • contribs) 21:44, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * . Maybe I'm missing it, but I don't see this on the blacklist.
 * I note that on my local computer, that site (IP address 209.190.24.8) is blocked as "malware" as of December 2010. Also, upon examining this site, it looks like a self-published blog, which generally aren't acceptable as references. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:18, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, the entire .co.cc domain is blacklisted and is not likely to be un-blacklisted anytime soon. — Jeremy (v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.!) 00:24, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

examiner.com
defunct Baltimore newspaper used in many articles, articles are available on the Wayback machine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk • contribs)


 * No, examiner.com is not 'a Baltimore newspaper', nor 'defunct'. It is a spam magnet, has been spammed by site owners and by the writers (who earn money by making sure people are visiting the site - note, these are not 'paid editors' of examiner.com, it is 'the man in the street' who can make a free account there and earn money by creating any document there and making sure people are going there), has been requested for de-listing/whitelisting for the same reason, ánd is (generally) an unreliable source.  Please consider asking for specific links being whitelisted, but delisting is (again) .  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 09:07, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Army-Guide.Com


How did this even make it onto the spam list? It's a military info website just like global security or army recognition. 99.236.221.124 (talk) 15:37, 16 December 2010 (UTC)


 * With a couple of handfuls of IPs and editors spamming it uncontrollably (and that is what happened here - see Special:LinkSearch/*.army-guide.com for the tagged accounts), most sites will make it in the end. Spam is not necessarily about the content the site contains, it may also be about how editors are pushing the site.
 * That being said, it is quite some time ago. How exactly is this site suitable, and what information does it add to Wikipedia?  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 15:48, 16 December 2010 (UTC)


 * due to lack of reply. Stifle (talk) 10:40, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

niralimagazine.com
Last year I requested that this site be blacklisted because of malware. MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/October_2009. The site has now been repaired. An article on the site is used as a source for Navi Rawat.  Will Beback   talk    03:45, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * You're a sysop, do it yourself, eh? :) (Are you satisfied it's fully back in order?) Stifle (talk) 10:41, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Gee, I never tried that before. I found it and removed it. Thanks for the tip.   Will Beback    talk    22:49, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

dyingscene.com
This is a punk news site that constantly contains relevant and up-to-date information that can be used to reference many wikipedia pages. According to the log, the site was blacklisted in 2009 but no reason was provided in the log. Brightknees (talk) 02:07, 30 January 2011 (UTC)


 * The reason provided in the log is "repeat spamming of NN zine", and it was spammed by a "role account" associated with the webpage in question; see blacklist addition, logging, edits by the spamming username, and especially this previous removal discussion. I'll let others decide if there's a reason to remove this from the blacklist, but it would be helpful to provide the names of specific pages that could be improved by a link to this site. — Gavia immer (talk) 02:12, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Cobra Skulls - Music style would be improved by adding a link an interview the site did with the band. . Here the information about the bands music style is more detailed.

The Flatliners did an extensive interview with this particular site which could be used to expand their Wiki page dramatically

Trial & Error Records also did an interview with the site which would expand their wiki page with more information about the actual label and it's history.

Descendents member, Karl confirmed that the band would continue to make music and tour after almost ten years of being on hiatus

Fletcher Dragge of Pennywise (band) also went into detail about the departure of the bands front man, Jim Lindberg. Brightknees (talk) 06:08, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

RE: Comment below Blacklister -- This is an old wikipedia account that I've only started using again. Apologies, I couldn't find reasons in the log. I only requested removal from blacklist to while attempting to update the Cobra Skulls page. The addition to the proposed removals was not intended to be suspicious. I cannot talk for the site in question but the punk community isn't as large as that of other music genres so wouldn't it be of use to gather as much information for pages as possible? I saw an interview with the owner of Anchorless Records on the site which could be used in conjunction with other sites, to make a whole new informative page on that particular label as it doesn't currently exist. There is even a new release mentioned in the interview that had not been announced elsewhere at the time. .

In regard to the argument, 'I highly doubt that any non-notable music blogs gets a scoop that isn't available anywhere else', how are the above not exclusive? All were provided to said site directly from the band or label therefore making it the most reputable source. The references are all original sources that any 'notable' music blog would have to reference to should they mention any of the information on their own site. Note the music style of the Cobra Skulls in particular. That information is straight from the band member as are all referenced articles. By Wikipedia standards, what level of readership constitutes a 'notable' music blog? I can find the Notability (music) guidelines that relates to the artists & composers but not for those reporting on it. Brightknees (talk) 00:22, 31 January 2011 (UTC)


 * WP:WEB deals with website notability. Given the past spam campaigns involving this site, blacklisting is inappropriate. Whitelisting may be appropriate for individual cases, but would only be considered if that information was available elsewhere. Further, do you have any WP:COI involving this site (i.e., are you affiliated with it in any way?) OhNo itsJamie  Talk 15:01, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Notes Regarding a few of the examples above: (1) The Descendents official site makes it clear they are still touring. (2) Pennywise's official site elaborates on the effects of Lindberg's departure sufficiently.]. Etc., etc. OhNo itsJamie Talk 15:07, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not affiliated, I just like a good argument. After going back through the links other Wiki Editors provided, in this previous removal discussion there was no final resolution on a solid argument by the owner. "Given the past spam campaigns involving this site, blacklisting removal is inappropriate. Whitelisting may be appropriate for individual cases, but would only be considered if that information was not available elsewhere", this makes no sense. Blacklisting is inappropriate due to spam, an issue resolved in the linked discussion by the owner but whitelisting is appropriate if the information is available elsewhere. If the information came from another source, why would it be linked to this site in the first place?

That Descendents story was linked to many other places on the internet, and how I found the site in the first place. At the time of publication, the band weren't touring, nor was there any information available that would lead you to the assumption that they were.Brightknees (talk) 21:21, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I made two mistakes in that paragraph (see corrections in bold above). In any case ❌ because (1) a "trusted, high-volume editor" is not making the request (2) the site was abusively spammed in the past and (3) there's no solid evidence that blacklisting it is harming the project, as most if not all of usable info is available elsewhere (i.e., official channels. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 21:32, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Numia
Numia.biz is one of the best free online accounting software. The website has been blocked by wiki for the purpose of posting an article about numia on wiki. Some hackers had used numia.biz to edit wiki pages purely for the sake of moving numia to wiki spamlist. Kindly consider removing numia.biz from the wiki spam blacklist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.165.222.92 (talk • contribs)


 * . Being "one of the best" is irrelevant; it has to meet WP:N criteria. Your assertion about why numia.biz was blacklisted would be more credible if it came from a trusted, high-volume editor. ~Amatulić (talk) 01:43, 3 February 2011 (UTC)