MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/October 2019

punjnud.com


Site is a mixed collection of Pakistani literary works (certainly COPYVIO) and news articles copied from elsewhere (possible COPYVIO). Unlikely to be ever used as a RS. It has been added as REFSPAM in multiple (~50) articles by the above IP editors - please look at their contribution history. — kashmīrī  TALK  07:52, 30 September 2019 (UTC)


 * The COIBot report shows a large number of red-linked users and IPs, and leads to e.g.:
 * Draft:Punjnud.com a collection of unicode based Urdu, Punjabi, Sindhi, Pashto and Saraiki books and articles.
 * Next edit will be obvious. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 05:19, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Next edit will be obvious. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 05:19, 1 October 2019 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:20, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

camcavetxegiacao.com

 * Spambots. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 13:21, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Spambots. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 13:21, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Spambots. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 13:21, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Spambots. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 13:21, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Spambots. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 13:21, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Spambots. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 13:21, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Unable to edit en:Miami because of blacklisted citation


I tried to revert this edit at Miami, but the edit is blocked because it contains a new link to an external site on the blacklist. The only thing the revert should be adding to the article is a ">". The citation that is being repaired in the edit is a named ref to a Census Bureau site, and in any case an anon IP was able to delete that ">" without triggering the blacklist. So how do I find out what is blocking the edit? - Donald Albury 23:30, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I was able to revert it just fine. The spam blacklist entry you were hitting is this: . Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:09, 2 October 2019 (UTC)


 * it would be better to decide what needs to be done with that link. IIRC that site is notoriously unreliable.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 03:26, 2 October 2019 (UTC)


 * I removed the citation from the article, and the sentence it supported, as it was based on the elevation of a point that is not in the city. While the sentence supported by the citation was part of a general discussion of the geology of South Florida, and may have been appropriate in the article, I did not feel it was essential to the article about the city. In the meantime, there are other citations in that article that need to be reviewed, but that is another story for another day. - Donald Albury 17:07, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

petroff.bg
These editors have all created sandbox pages in their userspace (now all deleted) promoting petroff.bg. It's been going on for years. Also documented at Sockpuppet investigations/Masondopler. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:26, 2 October 2019 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (help!) 20:46, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

adult-mag.com
Appears to be at a minimum, an attempt to gather contact info, or possibly a malware phishing attack of some sort. This edit of mine at removed an inline external link to adult-mag from the article. When I clicked it prior to that, it popped up a browser dialog box with an [OK] button, preceded by text presuming to be from a cable company, with a link not related to the company. When I backed out and tried again, I got a parked domain. The article Adult (magazine) lists a Tumblr domain as their website. Mathglot (talk) 19:27, 1 October 2019 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. Yes, appears infested. --Guy (help!) 20:45, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Have you or someone already removed links from articles? I'm pretty sure I spotted half a dozen or more active links, but I don't remember my exact search, and in a cursory look I don't see them now, but I'm not sure if I'm executing the search correctly. Mathglot (talk) 22:00, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Seems not. Guy (help!) 22:05, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah, that was it; thanks. Mathglot (talk) 01:39, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

utilitydesign
Domain was reported for spam activity and blacklisted by user in 2008. As one of the UK's largest official stockists of designer furniture and lighting I'm surprised to see that it was blacklisted for spamming furniture and designer related terms. Along with their category and designer page listings this website's blog is an award nominated and valuable resource for these topics. Please kindly reconsider blacklist status. Thanks Shaunyness (talk) 10:23, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * In which article do you think there should be a link, and supporting what content? Guy (help!) 10:42, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I found the blacklist status after going down a bit of a rabbit hole but as an example, the article  RE the history of Philippe Starck page Gun Lamp I feel would support the existing Philippe Starck page as it references the charitable cause behind the designer's political messaging. Shaunyness (talk) 11:47, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The spamming in 2008 was rather heavy, though a long time ago (which is not necessarily a factor). You state that this is basically a blog, which have limited utility on Wikipedia.  I guess that its use would better be defined through some specific requests at the whitelist first (i.e., specific links for specific Wikipedia pages), so .  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 11:04, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Also, I am interested why you wanted to link  (as opposed to, say,  ) on a page that is stating 'He was denied a job for Flos Lighting,  ...', where the page you wanted to link to, likely rather obviously, does not mention Shiu-Kay anywhere on the page.  Can you please explain?  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 11:11, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I see your point (RE linking to Flos.com) but I guess given that the brand is "Flos" rather than "Flos Lighting" a link to the lighting collection specifically seemed to make more sense at the time. I didn't think the mention of Shiu-Kay would be relevant in determining the usefulness of the linked domain but rather the collection of lighting product from designers successfully hired by Flos would give perspective. Thanks Shaunyness (talk) 11:47, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * In which case we would link to "Flos (designer company) lightning", we do not use external links in prose. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 11:51, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Understood and appreciate your response. Noted for future. Thanks Shaunyness (talk) 11:55, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

colomba.bg
Same behavior as with petroff.bg above, just a different .bg link. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:23, 3 October 2019 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:30, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Wondershare
I am unsure why this site was added to the Wikipedia blacklist, but I can only imagine that it because people were forcefully trying to add links from the website to certain articles back in 2013, and it might have been a violation. Nevertheless, I would request that it be removed from the said list.

While I am an employee of Wondershare in Canada, I am not making this request on their behalf, I am not a member of their marketing department, and I hope to present this case in the most unbiased way I can. Wondershare is a reliable software company and its products are used by a large community of internet users. Wondershare software is featured by resellers and there have been press articles released by well-respected and credible sources dedicated to describing the benefits of Wondershare software products.

Wikipedia articles comparing Video Editing, PDF Editing, Data Recovery, and Diagramming software products and technical capabilities are incomplete for researchers and technical analysts.

Additionally, perhaps, in the foreseeable future, an informative article covering Wondershare—itself becoming a well-known technology provider—would be something of interest to the public. I cannot determine whether or not the excessive editing with links to wondershare.com (which indicates some conflict of interest) will ever happen again, but I would argue that it seems to have ceased for years from now. Perhaps, in light of all the above, the site should be removed from the blacklist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FrankLorne (talk • contribs)
 * meta. As was noted the last time this came up, it's blacklisted on meta, not here. Note that a request was declined on meta in 2014. Your company has already made several unsuccessful attempts to create an article., , and Wondershare (deleted via WP:PROD and WP:SPEEDY several times. OhNo itsJamie Talk 01:40, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Natural News


There is strong noticeboard consensus at to blacklist Natural News as a fake news website that primarily publishes conspiracy theories and pseudoscience. —  Newslinger  talk   01:47, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 03:11, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Please could a different admin consider pv-magazine.com
This has been requested many times over the past decade as you can see from my previous request at MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/February_2019 and the archives:. I am not disputing their spamming many years ago but just saying that given the urgency of fixing global warming it is really a waste of editors' time to try to find other sources given that this seems fairly comprehensive and perfectly reliable. So I suggest it is time to give them another chance as I suspect some editors probably give up on their edits because of this blocking. Please could an admin other than Beetstra reconsider for a fresh view of the issue.

I often edit environmental articles about Turkey and the magazine has a section "www.pv-magazine.com/region/turkey/". For example the article "Turkey’s net-metering: Will commercial, residential or municipal lead the way?" is short but gives analysis hard to find elsewhere in easy to read English, so could be used to improve solar power in Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 05:56, 4 October 2019 (UTC)


 * , sorry. As per prior requests, this is basically a trade paper that is based in large part on press releases and they are known to watch this page with a view to resuming linking, e.g. by employed writers . There is no shortage of peer-reviewed engineering journals that are a substantially better fit for Wikipedia. --Guy (help!) 12:31, 4 October 2019 (UTC)


 * I agree there are good engineering journals but it is not really engineering I wished to write about in this case but government. To take the example of the article above I would like to write something like "According to local solar businesses the take up of residential solar is being hindered by the need to persuade multiple layers of government of its benefits." There is plenty of material for when net metering was introduced and how it might work (such as this) but little criticising how it is actually working in practice. Obviously government supporting English language media such as Anadolu Agency or Daily Sabah will not criticise the government bureaucracy. It is possible something might appear eventually on Google Scholar but meanwhile it is hard to find an alternative source to support my example sentence. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:12, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , then you can always find a non-english source (where pv-magazine likely based their report on ...), or decide to see if you can get it past a whitelist request. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 14:20, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I would be prepared to bet money that the statement can be traced back to a lobbyist for a solar power company. Guy (help!) 18:07, 4 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes you are right, the article is based on the views of a solar power company and the writer has disclosed that his trip to the trade fair was paid for. My point is that the article is criticising government and is therefore not available in Turkish as the government controls the media here.Chidgk1 (talk) 05:07, 5 October 2019 (UTC)


 * . Badly spammed, in by far the most cases easy to replace.  Just regurgitations of presss releases, nothing more.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 13:05, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * by another admin as well. Hope that helps. OhNo itsJamie Talk 14:49, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

It seems there is something wrong with this blacklist entry. See for example this diff from today. - MrOllie (talk) 15:58, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, that particular one is on the whitelist. - MrOllie (talk) 18:09, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

officiallibracoin.com


Fake website, likely a scam, spammed to Libra (cryptocurrency) multiple times. Diffs: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, everything by this guy. Saucy[talk – contribs] 04:15, 5 October 2019 (UTC)


 * , cross-wiki problem. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:04, 5 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Handled on meta. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:06, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

gujunews.in
Being spammed by multiple IP addresses.  Ravensfire  (talk) 00:36, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 01:10, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

hartforth.com
It's a personal website belonging to an individual (claiming to be "Sir Knight Dr Anton Anderssen, Lord of Hartforth" on social networking sites and CV sites on the 'Net) who makes false claims about having a British noble title, "Lord Hartforth", a title that doesn't exist, and then apparently using that to scam people in the US. Links to the site, along with the false claims about the title, have been added regularly to articles here for more than ten years now, primarily to Hartforth and Anderssen, being swiftly added back again every time it's removed (see recent page history of Hartforth). - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 14:30, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , Did any of the social networking sites get added as well? If so, which?  —Dirk Beetstra T  C 18:10, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I haven't seen any of the other sites being added here, I found them when doing a search on the name of the person, when trying to figure out what this was all about. When doing some research here on WP I also found accusations about the fake title being actively used for scamming people. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 18:39, 8 October 2019 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:05, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

movid.ml


Being used in 123Movies, seems to be a piracy site. Special:Diff/919718463, Special:Diff/919571937, Special:Diff/919566402, etc. --Majavah (t/c) 10:35, 5 October 2019 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:51, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

facebook.com/jinnylimkeen
Shouldn't this edit have been blocked, based on the existing pattern. —[ Alan M 1 (talk) ]— 19:25, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , no, the link misses the trailing / ... I’ll try to fix it later if noone else beats me to removing the last \/ Dirk Beetstra T C 03:49, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I have truncated to .  Next step is to just take out the whole facebook account with prejudice to taking out all others that then are used to circumvent.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 05:15, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

freebooksmania.com


Continued spamming of a likely copyright-violating download site after multiple warnings and an initial short-time block (now indeffed). Should be an obvious case, but a second pair of eyes double-checking the situation would be great to be sure. GermanJoe (talk) 12:32, 10 October 2019 (UTC)


 * this may have to go to meta, but you have my blessing to blacklist it here. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 12:38, 10 October 2019 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --GermanJoe (talk) 12:42, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Woo-hoo! Your first blacklist addition! Congrats to, our newest spam wrangler! Guy (help!) 16:08, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , he even found the script ... (take care, it has quirks, check if all is fine). --Dirk Beetstra T  C 17:19, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

1920 Akron Pros season
I tried to restore a citation ("NFL History (March 10, 2003)") to this article that was removed a few years ago, it seems, because the archived URL was not working. The archived URL is working now, but the underlying URL leads to a malicious website; I thus can't add it to the "url=" parameter, even with a "url-status=dead" parameter. Accordingly, the archived URL will not display. Does anyone have any suggestions of how to resolve this? Thanks, --Usernameunique (talk) 03:15, 11 October 2019 (UTC)


 * for the specific link. We'll have a look. Do post the link (you may need to break it or nowiki it. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 04:29, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, . Do you mean I should ask about the link at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist? The archived live, which is fine, is http://replay.web.archive.org/20070222012552/http://nfl BREAK history.net/linescores/pdf/1920.pdf (note the insertion of "BREAK" in the middle) — the original link, however (which you can see at the end of the archived link) appears to lead to a malicious redirect. --Usernameunique (talk) 04:49, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , yes, this may be best solved through whitelisting. I guess now that this is collateral damage caused by the influx of sport merchandise spam (whole sets of sites with ‘nfl’ in the name.  We’ll investigate there.  —Dirk Beetstra T  C 05:54, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

politicaluprise.com


A seem personal blog like "news/current affair website" was spammed by the user. Google search show no hit, but echo of contributions of the user at Twitter (using Sajjadkazmi946), Instagram and Facebook (using the name "Political Uprising"). Wikipedia is not place to promote start-up news website. Special:Diff/920754286, Special:Diff/920755723, Special:Diff/920757508. Matthew hk (talk) 17:46, 11 October 2019 (UTC)


 * , lets first see if the message gets through now, or after a block. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:42, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

influencercash.co
User keeps posting link to page and seems to attach their user name to the end of the link. Probably an account trying to share personal link to gain on IFCO. AmericanAir88(talk) 17:44, 14 October 2019 (UTC)


 * thankyou for reporting this, but, I see only one addition and the user is blocked. If this persists on multiple accounts we will reconsider this. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 03:10, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

zoominfo.com
This isn't the first IP/user I've seen WP:REFSPAMming links to this site in this way. I didn't record the others (but I can in future), but I've reverted almost identical WP:REFSPAM from at least half a dozen other IP/users in the last month or two. There may, I suppose, be occasions where this is a valid source for a reference, and there are, I know, existing links but I haven't seen any occasions where it's an irreplaceable, reliable source, and this is a campaign to use us to drive traffic to the site, imo. -- Begoon 09:32, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Adding . -- Begoon 11:00, 14 October 2019 (UTC)


 * to User:XLinkBot/RevertList. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:44, 14 October 2019 (UTC)


 * to User:XLinkBot/RevertReferencesList. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:45, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you. -- Begoon 12:01, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , should have therefore been bot-reverted? Or was I just too quick for the bot? If the latter then I'll leave any more I notice on my watchlist for a while to give the bot a chance... -- Begoon 12:08, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , I'll have to check, bot had hickups lately. Dirk Beetstra T C 14:09, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks. It looks like the bot reverted one of 122.178.101.169's contributions - . I've done the others now. Cheers. -- Begoon 14:54, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I just noticed this, so it seems to be working. -- Begoon 04:55, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

This starts to be annoying:



All SPAs, same MO as previous IPs. It looks a bit strange to me that this is zoominfo themselves promoting ... (, maybe time for a RS/N to see if this is even usable?). --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:21, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , there seem to be a couple of hundred existing links in article space (unless I messed up my search parameters). As I said above, I've not really seen a case where it's essential, and they are a commercial company who makes money out of selling access to their database, so I'm not sure. Joe job? Perhaps, but a pretty determined one if that's the case - and for what reason? Big time investment for a competitor or an ex-employee with a grudge, I'd have thought - but who knows... The Ips above all geolocate to India, but I guess the fact that someone might be outsourcing spamming shouldn't be too surprising. -- Begoon 06:32, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I have a VPN, I can be everywhere in Europe, IP addresses are difficult things, and indeed, there are some countries where there seem to be a lot of sweatshops doing stuff. Joe jobbers tend to be just as persistent as spammers.  XLinkBot does a decent job, but as you said, there are hundreds of links there, it may be good to investigate whether it is an idea to clean up and blacklist.  (other option, EditFilter before XLinkBot).  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 06:37, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok - I'll put it at RSN, see what others think. -- Begoon 06:40, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , Reliable_sources/Noticeboard. Cheers. -- Begoon 06:54, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

ianring.com
IP has been persistently adding this link to various music articles. Link is being used repeatedly as a non-RS source to back various OR claims as well as being added to various external link lists. This has been ongoing since 2017. This was originally posted on WP:ANI here. Blackmane (talk) 04:53, 18 October 2019 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

gpkm.wordpress.com


A new website directly related to "Pastor Isaiah Ogedegbe" (see deletion log, and that's only one of the many names the same promo-piece has been created as) and his globally blacklisted "warritimes.wordpress.com". See these edits adding the new website on Warri. The new user account has been reported as an obvious sock of User:Vwegba4real. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 16:07, 18 October 2019 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:06, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

careersngr.com


Nigerian "careers website" that is being repeatedly added to articles about Nigerian government agencies etc. Sample edits:, , , , , , ,. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 19:24, 18 October 2019 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:09, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

researchreportkart.com


Slow-motion spamming of "research report" links into articles on chemical topics. Activity has continued via IPs since was blocked and notified. -- The Anome (talk) 09:20, 19 October 2019 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist - obvious "research" spammer, initial block has been ignored. --GermanJoe (talk) 09:52, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you! -- The Anome (talk) 10:27, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Cspathway


Racked up a spam4 quite fast. Waiting for further reports. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:55, 20 October 2019 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:21, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

myinfer




One of the IPs was adding the other domain 6 minutes after the one noticed by LiWa3, waiting for reports. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:11, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

zipmex.com.au

 * Edits:
 * Edits:

Not many of these yet, but there's a pattern: slowly adding links to zipmex.com.au in references, from changeable IPs. It's the changing IPs that suggest blocking the URL may be needed - David Gerard (talk) 08:17, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * indeed, 4 IPs each with 1 edit. Unlikely that the fifth IP will get the message of the blocks.  .  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 08:22, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

3 .onions


BBC's Tor-accessible site, allowing direct access to BBC News via that service. Blacklisting is not necessary as the blanket *.onion ban is mostly for all of the barely-accessible and very shady content on the Darkweb, not this. Near as I can tell, the only *.onion URI around here is Facebook's for some reason. Not sure why we are only linking out to their walled garden surveillance network and not reliable news sources or valuable non-profits. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:23, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Freedom of the Press Foundation's Tor-accessible site, allowing direct access to BBC News via that service. Blacklisting is not necessary as the blanket *.onion ban is mostly for all of the barely-accessible and very shady content on the Darkweb, not this. Near as I can tell, the only *.onion URI around here is Facebook's for some reason. Not sure why we are only linking out to their walled garden surveillance network and not reliable news sources or valuable non-profits. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:23, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

ProPublica's Tor-accessible site, allowing direct access to BBC News via that service. Blacklisting is not necessary as the blanket *.onion ban is mostly for all of the barely-accessible and very shady content on the Darkweb, not this. Near as I can tell, the only *.onion URI around here is Facebook's for some reason. Not sure why we are only linking out to their walled garden surveillance network and not reliable news sources or valuable non-profits. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:40, 24 October 2019 (UTC)


 * First, this has to go through whitelisting of the independent domains, not through de-listing which would allow all the other domains to be listed. Second, I would not whitelist/delist these except if they were the official homepage of the subject of the page, i.e. we would need to have a page on BBC's .onion.  Facebook's .onion was whitelisted because, for whatever reason, we have a separate page for facebook's .onion @facebookcorewwwi.onion, that is where facebook's .onion is listed, not at Facebook.  And I see no reason to list this at BBC, since we are not a web directory, and we have the official website of BBC listed, and this is not a website that would work without people having special software installed.  We only list the official site that most people would consider the official website, not any/all other ones.  Wikipedia is not the place to find other websites of the organisation, that is the job of other websites out there, nor are we a service to allow direct access through darkweb services.
 * Note that the onion rule is not because of the shady websites, it is because of the constant abuse through the real .onions that were changed into false ones. We needed a pathway to regulate which ones (i.e., the official ones that were needeD) were to be linked.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 19:25, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , These are official. You remove them as "blogs" or "indirect" links--it seems like you fundamentally misunderstand them. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:45, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , I agree, my edit summary was wrong. Still, we define two official sites as excessive as well, second ones are only listed in very special cases. Dirk Beetstra T  C 04:21, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Dreamlist


See. Thanks for tagging the IPs/Users. -KH-1 (talk) 22:53, 24 October 2019 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. -- an SPI with checkuser would possibly be useful to clean up (recurring usage of single-purpose accounts).GermanJoe (talk) 07:42, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Bestculturaldestinations


Persistent linkspamming. The Banner talk 10:13, 23 October 2019 (UTC)


 * - recurring spam to blog with self-promotional content, warned in February 2019. to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --GermanJoe (talk) 07:55, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

dip-app.com


Repeatedly spammed as both refspam, in-line link spam and sneaked into new article sections that are added only as an excuse for adding the spamlink. Continuing even after multiple warnings. They have also been plugging the dip-app (dip is short for "Deals in Places") in text form in various places. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 10:21, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

penang-traveltips.com


I cannot find this on either the global or local blacklists, but I would like to use https:// www. penang-traveltips.com/francis-light-tomb.htm (I'm adding spaces here or it won't even allow me to save it here) if possible. I know it's not the most authoritative type of site, but together with other info I have which corroborates the researcher (Purdon) mentioned, it's the best I have for a particular bit of info at the moment. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 06:27, 25 October 2019 (UTC)


 * I guess it is better to whitelist the specific page: . --Dirk Beetstra T  C 10:11, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, - do you mean that I should copy my request over there? (As far as I can see by that one and a few other informational pages on the site, the info is fairly reliable, having found quite a bit of it corroborated, by digging around and finding some more obscure sources.) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 10:47, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , It is basically a copy indeed, but you need to add where you want to use it and how. The original blacklisting does not seem to be about reliability, it was about heavy spamming of quite a number of penang-related sites. Dirk Beetstra T  C 11:15, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks . I'll continue with it tomorrow. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 11:20, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

australiaeta.com.sg


Scam unofficial page to obtain Australian visas keeps getting added to Visa requirements for Singaporean citizens article - diff1, diff2.--Twofortnights (talk) 12:29, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

omnislots.com
I am one of the administrators of omnislots.com - one of our content writers tried to create an article on wikipedia about the company which resulted us to have been blocked. We take full responsibility of what have happened and we will avoid such actions in the future without having solid belief that our page should be there - at the right time, right content and right format. Could you please remove us from the list ? Thanks.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.207.145.42 (talk • contribs)
 * Not blacklisted here, see meta: . --Dirk Beetstra T  C 11:26, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks Dirk, will check link you shared. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.207.145.42 (talk • contribs)