MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/May 2012

= Proposed Additions =

Kuriositas
Website that takes most of its texts from Wikipedia without notification. Considered spamming by me due to the lack of original text and the added spamlinks in the text. For example, the page about Skellig Micheal] contains links to MBA-courses. The link to the aricle about the Lofoten contains links for holidays in Jamaica. Night of the Big Wind  talk  19:28, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Seems the spamming was isolated to one account. other additions of the link seem to have been done by good faith users. Lets hold off on this, however if it returns, we can reconsider., for now--Hu12 (talk) 15:46, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Russian Beatles fansite


Fansite being repeatedly added to a number of Beatles-related pages by a range of IPs. (I'd give diffs, but they'd simply replicate the entire contribution history of the above IPs) Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 12:06, 2 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Along with other issues...--Hu12 (talk) 15:34, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Along with other issues...--Hu12 (talk) 15:34, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

*.ejetgroup.com
In the last week I've removed this companies spam from half a dozen Chinese shopping mall pages (and by shopping mall I mean entire cities dedicated to B2B sales with the rest of the world, not american suburban malls). They've got multiple users and IPs adding links to anything remotely relevant to shopping, products, mass-transit that might get there, etc. It's too much to handle by protecting articles or blocking users or IPs, which has been done. SchmuckyTheCat (talk) 13:47, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Seems to have ceased. --Hu12 (talk) 15:21, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Seems to have ceased. --Hu12 (talk) 15:21, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

sexy-cosplay.net
Weekly spamming in cosplay:, , (etc.). The website: [http ://sexy-cosplay.net/] (stolen pictures posted with advertisments). --Niemti (talk) 13:57, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅--Hu12 (talk) 15:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅--Hu12 (talk) 15:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅--Hu12 (talk) 15:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅--Hu12 (talk) 15:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅--Hu12 (talk) 15:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅--Hu12 (talk) 15:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅--Hu12 (talk) 15:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅--Hu12 (talk) 15:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Ruggers
See Sockpuppet investigations/FreshTheBand. Scopecreep (talk) 06:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅--Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Fake Ukash site
Spam links repeatedly added to Ukash. A verifiable complaint from ukash.com claiming this is a scam site and nothing to do with their business has been received on OTRS ticket 2012051410003546. --Fæ (talk) 13:15, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

irvinevirtualoffice.com



 * Spammers

MER-C 04:50, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * by WilliamH. MER-C 07:12, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

effects-of-alcohol.org
An editor is continually adding links from alcohol articles to his marketing site. I have removed them for now. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 12:42, 17 May 2012 (UTC)



+ plus about another six.


 * More
 * Additionally, the site employs an aggressive popup screen script that disables navigation by forcing a visitor to "like" a face book page or wait 20 seconds for it to go away.--Hu12 (talk) 19:14, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Additionally, the site employs an aggressive popup screen script that disables navigation by forcing a visitor to "like" a face book page or wait 20 seconds for it to go away.--Hu12 (talk) 19:14, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Additionally, the site employs an aggressive popup screen script that disables navigation by forcing a visitor to "like" a face book page or wait 20 seconds for it to go away.--Hu12 (talk) 19:14, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Additionally, the site employs an aggressive popup screen script that disables navigation by forcing a visitor to "like" a face book page or wait 20 seconds for it to go away.--Hu12 (talk) 19:14, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

nailsandbeautyacademy.co.uk



 * Spammers

Beauty courses website. Links repeatedly added since around 2008. El0i (talk) 15:25, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * , thanks for reporting.--Hu12 (talk) 13:34, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

exposethelies.weebly.com
An IP-hopper using open proxies keeps spamming/trolling this site to user pages. Here is the latest,


 * 41.237.230.86
 * 200.21.130.44
 * 201.73.204.178

Please block ASAP. Thank you, ⋙–Berean–Hunter—►  21:00, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 00:50, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

pearlhelp.com


IP-hopping additions. Adding myself. tedder (talk) 00:20, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

= Proposed Removals =

online-scratch-card
{{report bottom}

I am currently attempting to improve a very bad (at least what I consider bad) article about online scratch cards. I re-wrote the article and included additional information about who regulates the activity (information cited from The Natinoal Lottery in the UK) and criticisms of it (Accusations of underage gaming). There are very few links other than commercial links (those trying to get you to play the game) available. I did locate an article that spoke about Camelot (who is the provider of the National Lottery in the UK); however, the URL to the article is blocked. It took me a little bit to figure out why, but I believe it was for THIS edit. Looks like someone tried to spam the link in the article back on March 10, 2012. Is there a way to unblock the site so that I can use the article. Like I said, there is not much information out there and this article seems to be the most unbiased source about the topic (they are in the business but not associated with any one provider). Here is the citation information:

--Morning277 (talk) 19:46, 3 May 2012 (UTC)


 * As an alternative is there a way to just do the single URL that I need to cite? I see that this is possible form other information I have read here. Thanks. --Morning277 (talk) 12:40, 4 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I am not an administrator, but I would not agree that online-scratch-card dot com qualifies as a WP:RS in the first place. Sources that support Wikipedia articles need to have "a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy."   The "news" section of this site appears to be nothing more than a self-published source.  It does not even rise to WP:NEWSBLOG because the underlying site itself is not in the news business.  Although the writers there say they are industry experts, they are anonymous (only revealing first names on their About Us page), so there is no way to verify that they are indeed experts.  If you still think this site qualifies as a reliable source, please take it to the reliable sources noticeboard.  I think it is correct to prevent links from Wikipedia to this site and I would keep this site black-listed.  If no reliable sources can be found to support the underlying article, then the subject of the underlying article fails WP:GNG and should be deleted.  I actually think whatever little salvageable content is in the article should be merged with Scratchcards, and the article redirected there.  Zad68 (talk) 13:17, 8 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I see your point. I am not defending the site, just trying to improve an already existing article. Sometimes a subject is notable but there is little press on the subject. The majority of the press that you find about online scratch cards is all affiliate sites trying to get you to gamble at their site. The press that I have found (which I will use to improve the article shortly) was very hard to find as it was mixed in with the hundreds of affiliate sites trying to make money off of the subject. Anyways, I will use what I have and you can let me know if you think the article is improved or not. Thanks again for your input. --Morning277 (talk) 13:23, 8 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Morning277, this statement: "Sometimes a subject is notable but there is little press on the subject." actually runs directly counter to Wikipedia's General notability guideline, which starts off with:  "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list." and Notability requires verifiable evidence, which says:  "No subject is automatically or inherently notable merely because it exists: The evidence must show the topic has gained significant independent coverage or recognition, and that this was not a mere short-term interest, nor a result of promotional activity or indiscriminate publicity, nor is the topic unsuitable for any other reason."  Please take a moment to review WP:N.  (Sorry I do not mean to Wiki-lawyer or beat you over the head with WP:CAPITALLETTERS but it appears your idea of notability is not in line with Wikipedia's.)  All the best.... Zad68 (talk) 13:36, 8 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Morning277, to white-list specific URLs on a blacklisted site. However, you will need to convince the admins monitoring the whitelist that this link qualifies as a reliable source. ~Amatulić (talk) 15:03, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Not sure if it is worth it at this point but I will take it to them to see their opinion. Thanks again. --Morning277 (talk) 15:30, 8 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Closed, discussed elsewhere MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist--Hu12 (talk) 15:37, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

spoti.com
I am trying to include a link from a multilingual trailer website and don´t understand why it is on the spam list. This site changed a lot ultimately and is very fast to load with Chrome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.218.84.245 (talk • contribs) 14:12, 11 May 2012‎
 * It was added as a result of mass, multi project spamming. If a specific link is needed as a citation feel free to request it on the whitelist on a case-by-case basis, where the url can be demonstrated as an appropriate source. --Hu12 (talk) 15:08, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

CRARG Story Project
Looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Holocaust_survivors it seems that the CRARG Story Project is relevant, so I attempted to add it. I wonder why CRARG sites are blocked? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farling2 (talk • contribs) 15:51, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked as a result of mass WP:SOCK Spamming and abuse, of which, your account is named. --Hu12 (talk) 03:34, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

linseydawnmckenzie.co.uk
I tried to add it to the Linsey Dawn McKenzie article but a "Spam filter notice" came up when I tried to save the page, According to her twitter page https ://twitter.com/Linsey_Dawn, it's her official site.--Wikien2009 (talk) 17:10, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Seriously? Your previous question on this same topic was just archived, here. Don't waste everyone's time. Anomie⚔ 22:49, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Repeated request..Closing as vextatious--Hu12 (talk) 02:10, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

bryancera.co.nr
I'm working on creating the page Glove One, and I have a slight problem that the designer's own site is blocked. For the moment I've replaced that site's references with "spam blocked" so that I can try to straighten this out and not risk losing my (non-so-advanced) work. Human.v2.0 (talk) 16:34, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * to allow linking to a specific pages on a site (not the whole site). ~Amatulić (talk) 20:04, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Livability.com and BusinessClimate.com


I'm a web content specialist for Journal Communications. I've been tasked with getting our sites removed from the Wikipedia spam list. At some point back in 2008, the websites of Journal Communications got blacklisted on Wikepedia. Here's more background info: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2008_Archive_Sep_1#Websites_of_Journal_Communications_Inc. here]

We are an independent publisher and create in-depth info about cities all over the U.S. with quality of life and relocation info. We have our own editorial staff as well as an in-house staff of photographers and videographers. We create original content about cities across America. We do extensive research on the communities that we cover including discussions/interviews with chambers of commerce and city governments to get accurate information.

We have discontinued many of our individual websites that used the Images brand (ex: imagesbrentwood.com) and created two aggregate websites -- Livability.com and BusinessClimate.com -- that contain most of our content about cities.

We are requesting removal from the Wikipedia spam list.

We're also requesting clarification if we can link from cities to the digital magazines and online content that we produce about those cities. We see other websites that do the exact same thing that we do linked to from Wikipedia.

A specific example is for the Wikipedia entry for Austin, TX. Under the further reading section there is a link to austinnewcomeronline.com. We work with both chambers of commerce and economic development organizations all throughout the U.S. We provide well-researched, original content that provides additional information about cities and communities that would provide benefit for readers interested in a city.

Are we allowed to link to our content as austinnewcomeronline.com has done for Austin?

Thanks in advance for your assistance.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhoodbiz (talk • contribs) 15:59, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Dear John Hood's bisuness account for Journal Communications . Typically, we do not remove domains from the blacklist in response to "National Spokesperson for Livability.com/PR/Web Product/SEO at Journal Communications Inc." requests. Instead, we de-blacklist sites when trusted, high-volume editors request the use of blacklisted links because of their encyclopedic value in support of our encyclopedia pages. If a specific link is needed as a citation, an etablished editor can request it on the whitelist on a case-by-case basis, where the url can be demonstrated as a source (in an appropriate context) when there are no reasonable alternatives available.


 * Here are some Helpful applicable rules and guidelines:
 * SPAM
 * External link spamming
 * Source soliciting
 * How not to be a spammer
 * External links policy
 * Links normally to be avoided
 * Advertising and conflicts of interest
 * Conflict of interest
 * Editors who have a conflict of interest
 * Accounts used for promotion
 * Law Of Unintended Consequences
 * What Wikipedia is not
 * Wikipedia is not a directory
 * Wikipedia is not a repository for links
 * Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising
 * BLOCK
 * Persistent spamming
 * Breaching the sock puppetry policy;
 * Accounts that appear, based on their edit history, to exist for the sole or primary purpose of promoting a person, company, product, service, or organization in apparent violation of Conflict of interest or anti-spam guidelines.


 * Equally Wikipedia is not a place to to promote your sites.--Hu12 (talk) 19:37, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Moviezadda.com
remove blacklist — Preceding unsigned comment added by Just2like (talk • contribs)
 * Why?? --Dirk Beetstra T  C 05:29, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

hi,Dirk Beetstra this is whole Entertainment site related bollywood movies reviews, rating and celeb gossips. I just a added link in wikipedia pages our related a bollywood movies and news. all references links are relevancy article source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Just2like (talk • contribs) 06:13, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Sock puppet request. --Hu12 (talk) 17:54, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

= Troubleshooting and problems =

= Discussion =