MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/July 2008

= Proposed Additions =

nhlhockeypersonalchecks.com
See the contributions of User:24.235.252.104. --Blanchardb- Me • MyEars • MyMouth -timed 02:39, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Personally blacklisting this for a small number of pages & one IP is a bit much for now. If the IP comes back feel free to prod me & I will place what I consider an appropriate block ) & see if that makes them understand rather more.  It may need listing but not quite yet I think.  Leave open for now & thanks -- Herby  talk thyme 11:02, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

eardoc.info
Claims for this commercial device and spam links to its website been repeatedly inserted into multiple article on ear disorders by a user (now indefinitely blocked) and some anon IPs over a prolonged period of time.



I'm in process of completing rest of blacklist process, so will complete my own request shortly.David Ruben Talk 22:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

✅ David Ruben Talk 22:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Bollywood spam


Recurring Flash Bollywood spam. . MER-C 13:07, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, given IPs & a user placing these appropriate I think so ✅ -- Herby talk thyme 19:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

And again:



See and. MER-C 12:07, 28 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes - guess that was quite likely. ✅ thanks -- Herby  talk thyme 12:13, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia Review
Compromised noticeboard site that attempts to download a virus to MSIE users. User on many en.wiki pages.  MBisanz  talk 07:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Done for reasons stated. Viridae Talk 07:18, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I concur in blacklisting for now. Given all the controversy around this site, any permanent blacklisting should be based on wide community consensus. In that spirit, as soon as this site is back on line and safe, it should be removed from the blacklist. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:01, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I am creating a COIBot report. (done, but too many records; 445 records; strangely, this link seems only to be added to en in the last 6 months or so). If it is unsafe, maybe it should be on the meta-blacklist?  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 17:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: Why there are probably few old links to WR -- as I recall we had a witch hunt last year for WR links. Someone was going around throwing warnings at long-time editors for having link to an "attack site" on their user or user talk pages. Folks were threatened with blocks if they didn't toe the line. Eventually this movement crashed of its own accord-- kind of like McCarthyism. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:16, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Dirk, you're right. I don't have time to handle this now, but it should be removed here and added temporarily to the meta blacklist. Other Wikimedia projects use its links as well. Normally any site with malicious code gets added at meta, even if it's only on one project. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Will do that. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 17:16, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * It seems to have shaken off the malware now... it's not really back up yet, but has a temporary page explaining the situation (and malware-free as far as I can tell). *Dan T.* (talk) 17:16, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh .. I just added it to the meta blacklist. OK to remove then?  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 17:24, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I see that it was removed here as well as repaired, have removed it again to minimize disruption. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 17:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

--Dirk Beetstra T C 21:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

threehosts.com
Several persistent IP editors have spammed this link to Shared web hosting service and Web hosting service. Usually they wrap the link in a few paragraphs of text headed "Finding Reliable Web Hosting Services". I have reverted these edits and warned three of the anon IPs with template uw-spam4im, but new IPs spam again in whack-a-mole style. Whois shows the spammers at various IP addresses owned by "SHATEL Network Operations Team" in Tehran, Iran.
 * Among the spammers are

Please blacklist this link, thank you. --CliffC (talk) 21:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed & ✅, thanks -- Herby talk thyme 12:11, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

after blacklisting, threehosts.com moved to threehosts.atspace.com
Herbythyme, thanks for your prompt action. Now they have moved and are spamming the same articles from a second ISP in Tehran as well, with the same text. --CliffC (talk) 13:22, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The new spam IPs are


 * Oh goody! Now ✅ and the two articles s-prot for a couple of days just in case... :)  Let me know if I can help, cheers -- Herby  talk thyme 13:29, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

??? now it's top-host.atspace.com
FYI. I don't know the solution for this newest event since Wikipedia has many, many links to atspace.com, but then I'm not an admin. Thanks again. --CliffC (talk) 13:39, 28 June 2008 (UTC)


 * No worries - I'm only listing the specific domains not the high level one so it should be ok (of course - if not I've just remembered something really important I have to do:)). ✅ and given s-prot for a couple of days we will have peace for a while (I hope).  Cheers -- Herby  talk thyme 13:43, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

dermatologistsnyc.com


Sockpuppeteering spammer, 16 accounts so far. . MER-C 02:46, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this account has no regard to the policies by sockpuppeting, so ✅ -- w L &lt;speak&middot;check&gt; 04:36, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

GameAnyone.com


Was listed at WikiProject Spam, but was deferred over to here. Quoting the report from WT:WPSPAM:
 * GameAnyone.com has been spamming multiple video game articles with links to it's "reviews" in the External Links section. This editor, 67.181.228.6 has been the primary spammer of this domain. He has been warned many times in the past for spamming but has continued to do so. If you view his contributions, all his edits have been to spam this domain.

The user is currently blocked, but considering IP is the "primary" spammer of the links, there's probably more addresses that were inserting this domain into articles. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 20:13, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed thanks & ✅ -- Herby talk thyme 11:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

shadow-arcade.com


Inserted into several articles many times over a long period of time. User acknowledges warnings, says he'll stop spamming - and then reinserts the link. - MrOllie (talk) 17:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * ❌: I've warned User:Asifsra about what we consider spamming and that his site is almost blacklisted. You may want to look into it if he posts again. -- w L &lt;speak&middot;check&gt;
 * He just did. - MrOllie (talk) 19:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * And again. Some assistance would be welcome. - MrOllie (talk) 17:13, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Both accounts now on 72 hour blocks. Out of time for me for now but I will list this domain tomorrow if no one beats me to it. Cheers -- Herby talk thyme 18:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * ✅ now -- Herby talk thyme 11:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

andrewleaning.com


Persistent spamming, caught in the act yet again. . MER-C 11:45, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * ✅ thanks -- Herby talk thyme 14:44, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

herbs4cures.ecrater.com/ "SEO Hotline 425 605 0665"
-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC)


 * In addition to the link above, this blackhat SEO spammer was adding text such as "SEO Hotline 425 605 0665" to various articles.


 * ✅. herbs4cures.ecrater.com is now blacklisted. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

developersbook.com
Repeated addition of multiple links to domain. Article histories show ELs frequently removed and then replaced. ELs inserted into See Also sections and replacing authoritative ELs and/or likely competition. More details at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam Caomhin (talk) 11:00, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, looks like spamming & the link theft to me is the final indicator for listing. Thanks - ✅ -- Herby  talk thyme 11:19, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

indiaeducation.net

 * Spammers

Egregious IP switching link spam. . There are also about 150 related domains which haven't been spammed yet - I won't bother duplicating that list here. MER-C 12:20, 4 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Given IP hopping & current activity ✅. -- Herby talk thyme 12:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

rockon.ro
Domain redirects to metalheads ro which is blacklisted

Mass adds by IP users such as (That IP previous blocked for spamming metalheads User_talk:89.42.133.71)

Caomhin (talk) 13:06, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ by Dirk Beetstra - I wasn't paying attention and he blacklisted between my first spotting and finishing the removals Caomhin (talk) 13:12, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed, ✅ on meta, the ips/socks seem to have more on the same server, though (annoyingly, there is also good stuff on the same server; see Linksearch on server IP, again, there are unrelated links here as well!, another site spammed is WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/bestmusic.ro - 194.88.148.12). Many socks (metalheadro, Metalheadromania, Mhro2) and IPs (194.88.148.0/23, 89.42.132.0/22, 81.12.128.0/17), I identified another domain they added to wikipedia and blacklisted that as well (metalheadtv.com).  Please keep an eye open, there will probably be more/new stuff.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 15:35, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

readysteadygirls.eu
Account seems to exist for sole purpose of adding ELs. According to CecilK the account is blocked on .de, the same name seems to be adding ELs across the EU.

Caomhin (talk) 21:06, 14 July 2008 (UTC)


 * -- now blacklisted on meta. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 00:51, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

= Proposed Removals =

applausestore.com
I would like to use applausestore.com to reference a new show, Step up to the Plate, hosted by Loyd Grossman in the Loyd Grossman article. The link is given in wikicomments on that page. Rhebus (talk) 12:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Scratch that, I found a better source, withdrawing request. Rhebus (talk) 12:34, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

meshofficechairs.co.uk
I request that meshofficechairs.co.uk be removed from the list. I was trying to write the article about the Ergohuman. I included the UK and US suppliers. It let me include the US one but not the UK one. So I am slightly confused as to why it blocked it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niceday2008 (talk • contribs) 09:24, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * See WikiProject Spam Item (1) / (2) / checkuser/Case--Hu12 (talk) 04:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is NOT a "vehicle for advertising" . Please take a look at the specific requirements of our External Links and Reliable Sources guidelines. I don't think this link meets either guideline.--Hu12 (talk) 04:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

letterwhiz.com
I ask that letterwhiz.com be removed from the list. I spoke to the former site admin and he said we were originally blacklisted because he "didn't understand the rules of Wikipedia." He was a junior member on our team and shouldn't have been adding links on the organization's behalf in the first place. He also claims that he believes the Wikipedia editor was being malicious with the removal of our link, though we have not been able to verify this internally. Since we provide free letter templates, we feel a link to our site may be of benefit on Wikipedia pages that discuss writing business and love letters in particular. Thank you for your consideration.Letterwhiz (talk) 18:43, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * JuneWarren Publishing Ltd. Mass spamming
 * Typically, we do not remove domains from the spam blacklist in response to site-owners' requests, and this request appears to be made by a role account for Letterwhiz.com, as such this is . Equally Wikipedia is not a place to to promote a site--Hu12 (talk) 04:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

financemanila.net
I received an email requesting that financemanila.net be removed from the blacklist. It was added on April 26 by Hu12 (diff). Hu12 has been notified of this although he is on a wikibreak currently so probably won't respond. I'm posting it here because this is the proper venue to request removal. James086 Talk &#124; Email 02:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Request info. I'll let another admin check for cross wiki (as I am on wikibreak). Thanks James--Hu12 (talk) 04:14, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think the site should be removed from the blacklist (the email was also from the site owner). He/they were spamming persistently and it seems they came back to do some more but noticed the site was blocked. James086 Talk &#124;  Email 12:01, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Based on the link placement that took place I do not find a request from the site owner a particularly convincing request I'm afraid. I do not find the site convincing as being suitable for WP either I'm afraid. -- Herby talk thyme 12:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

No other views so -- Herby  talk thyme 07:15, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

discoverdalian.com
I am currently living in China, where wikipedia is routinely blocked as you know. The admin aware of my situation "Hu12" is on an extended wikibreak, so I am not sure the proper procedure to make an appeal. I have to use a proxy to access wikipedia, which is a terribly painful process.

The situation is this: a couple years ago I added an external link on the "Dalian" entry to my web site (discoverdalian [dot] com). While I do offer "for pay" services, my site offers a ton of free public information. It is recognized internationally as the best web site in English for information about the city of Dalian.

The official city web site is a terrible Chinglish translation, and is designed mostly for foreign investment. I understand that a government asking for money is different from a company. However, my site was a valid and useful external link for a long time.

Within the expat community here in Dalian, there are many elements fighting for attention. It has become a very dirty business. When my site link and dalianxpat.com were both removed as links from the "Dalian" wikipedia entry, I took this as part of the ongoing attack.

I undid the deletions, and put effort into keeping the link active in defense. The action of deletion was justified as the removal of spam, but it was not explained or noted with each removal. This happened in a very short time period in early May, and I suspected it was one individual with multiple accounts. The way the matter was dealt with made me feel very confused, because my link had been spam why wikipedia had permitted it to remain for so long.

I am not willing to accept that my link is spam, but I am willing to concede the point of not having it as an external link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/June_2008#dalianxpat.com.2C_discoverdalian.com

If you read the entry about the spam black list, you will note that no warning or explanation was given. A user complained, offered little proof in support, and my url was blacklisted. Not even my user account was banned, just the URL. I was never contacted by an admin, given the chance to explain my side, or simply warned so I would have the chance to surrender.

I am willing to accept the attack of individuals here in Dalian who want to control all information about the city. However, I will not accept the indignity of having my URL blacklisted on wikipedia. My company has enough media citations to justify its own wikipedia entry. Instead of being so bold, I was content with a simple external link.

If I ever do decide to submit a full entry, I would like the blacklist issue resolved now. Then if that entry is attacked I can defend it on its own merits, and support of wikipedia guidelines.

There is obvious evidence of warring over the "Dalian" external links. However, being blacklisted without warning is inappropriate and unfair. The issue was contained only to the link, and the heavy handed way it was deleted within a few week period leaves me a bit shocked. It is enough to make anyone defensive.

After the admin "Hu12" explained the external link situation, I let the matter drop and did not try to re-add mine or any other links. So I was very surprised and hurt that a few weeks later the URL was blacklisted. It was like I was kicked and gave in, so then why push the matter further? I think this is evidence enough of another individual trying to intimidate and make me appear a complete villain.

If my reactions at any time along the way were inappropriate, then I sincerely apologize. I understand that being an admin is a tough job and I hope that this decision can be reconsidered. I am routinely censored by the Chinese government, so perhaps I do take it personal when people living in a free and open society try to block me even when I try to make amends.

You will note in the "Beijing" entry - a city somewhat bigger than Dalian - there is an external link to a tour company. Their page has nothing but prices, not even basic helpful tour information. By the standards my link was judged against, this link should be considered spam and deleted. So why does it remain?

Beijing External links
 * 1) Beijing tours (Chinese) >>> http://www.chinatourselect.com/Single-City-Tour/City-Tours/Beijing-Tour-Bj-01.html

I make this point also to show that I have been singled out as a target by other interests, not over time but in a very short period. If this "Beijing" link is an accepted standard, then I would once again press my case to have my external link reinstated. However, at this point it is my wish and request to simply have the discoverdalian [dot] com URL removed from the spam-black list (along with dalianxpat.com).

Thank you very much for your time, consideration, and prompt reply to this matter.

Kazkura (talk) 15:51, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

As a result of this post, the above mentioned links from the Beijing entry were removed. I understand this action, however, they were not blacklisted. Therefore, I once again request resolution of the matter I have presented here. I am not asking to have the URL added as a link, only to have it removed from the ban list.

Kazkura (talk) 00:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


 * That kind of argument is sometimes referred to on Wikipedia as OtherStuffExists, and quite often ends up with this kind of result, that the other stuff no longer exists. ;-)
 * I had a look at discoverdalian.com and found some useful and informative content. I don't think it would be suitable for an external link as-is, but conceivably some of the reference material could be used for sourcing.  You seem to be OK with not having it as an external link and are more concerned about the honour-related issue of having it on a blacklist, so I would support de-blacklisting that.
 * dalianxpat.com seems to be a sort of combination Web directory/forum with some other information and an article system. I'm not sure the information on it would be useful to us, but if you don't intend to try and spam it into articles then I see no pressing need to ban it altogether; maybe somebody might find something on it we can use.
 * Summary: Support de-blacklisting of discoverdalian.com, weaker support for dalianxpat.com (would like to see others' opinions on that one). -- tiny plastic Grey Knight &#x2296; 15:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Closed as -- Herby  talk thyme 07:15, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

viartis.net
The web site appears to have been black listed automatically because it had been added to four Wikipedias. The specific page that was added was viartis.net/publishers/magellan.htm However, there are hundreds of web sites that are on dozens of Wikipedias, quite justifiably, because they are the only or the best source of information on the subject. It is apparent from checking the web page - details of a book on Magellan - that it is not SPAM. It is solely a source of more detailed information on the subjcet. There are comparable pages for specific books on Wikipedia, and even entire articles for many books. --Juan de Leon (talk) 15:35, 2 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Domain info:


 * The viartis.net site-owner appears to be the publisher of the book for which you just created a new article:
 * Magellan (book)


 * For the big picture, see:
 * Long term abuse/General Tojo


 * For additional details, see:
 * Wikipedia talk:Long term abuse/General Tojo
 * Talk:Parkinson's disease/Archive 2
 * Talk:Parkinson's disease/Archive 2
 * Talk:Parkinson's disease/Archive 2
 * meta:Talk:Spam blacklist/2007-03
 * meta:Talk:Spam blacklist/2006-08
 * meta:Talk:Spam blacklist/2006-10
 * meta:Talk:Spam blacklist/2007-03
 * meta:Talk:Spam blacklist/2007-04
 * meta:Talk:Spam blacklist/2007-08
 * Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of General Tojo -- over 100 confirmed sockpuppets
 * Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of General Tojo -- over 700 suspect accounts
 * MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2007/03
 * viartis.net was later returned to the blacklist:
 * meta:User:COIBot/XWiki/viartis.net
 * Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive207
 * Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Archive 2
 * Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Archive 2


 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:15, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

General Tojo concerns solely Parkinson's Disease related subjects. However, this web page viartis.net/publishers/magellan.htm instead concerns a biography of the discoverer Magellan. The only link between the two is the name for billing. However, during discussions on Wikipedia, the name of the person listing for billing was conclusively shown to be unrelated to General Tojo. A person listed for billing is often merely an accountant. Such an individual is certainly not an entire publishing company. --Juan de Leon (talk) 07:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Precisely which Wikipedia rule is supposed to justify the black listing of the web site ? At present, the reason appears to be a very tenuous link between a banned editor who is a Parkinson's Disease biochemist and a publishing company's book by historically known authors that solely concerns the discoverer Magellan. That, even if true, does not appear to come within Wikipedia rules at all. The American Nazi party's web site appears on Wikipedia, as does that of the Klu Klux Klan, and Osama Bin Laden, all of whose ideologies and web sites appear to be completely acceptable on Wikipedia. Yet an innocuous web page concerning a widely available book concerning Magellan, that is on just about every online book retailers web site from Amazon to Barnes and Noble is supposed to be detrimental to Wikipedia readers ! There is a massive inconsistency here that has no rational justification. --Juan de Leon (talk) 11:23, 8 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It's blacklisted due to spamming and POV-pushing, and it won't be removed simply because one page is potentially useful - although of course it's not that useful, as it's not a reliable source. Guy (Help!) 21:38, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

pagalkhana.com
I spoke to the former site admin and he said we were originally blacklisted because he "didn't understand the rules of Wikipedia." He was a junior member on our team and shouldn't have been adding links on the organization's behalf in the first place. He also claims that he believes the Wikipedia editor was being malicious with the removal of our link, though we have not been able to verify this internally. We have one of the largest video collection of Pakistani & Indian videos. Please unblock us 11:31, 10 July 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.190.38.171 (talk • contribs) 00:57, 12 July 2008


 * Here's the original entry:
 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Dec 1
 * (The three anonymous IPs involved were all using the same cable TV system in the greater New York City area; the same is true of the requester above.)


 * Typically, we do not remove domains from the spam blacklist in response to site-owners' requests. Instead, we de-blacklist sites when trusted, high-volume editors request the use of blacklisted links because of their encyclopaedic value in support of our encyclopaedia pages. If such an editor asks to use your links, I'm sure the request will be carefully considered and your links may well be removed. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:41, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Closed as per A. B. -- Herby  talk thyme 07:17, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

= Troubleshooting and problems =

= Discussion =