User talk:XLinkBot/RevertList/archives/July 2010

= Handled additions =

littletoons.com and variants


Links across various articles, all usually childrens television related. Each link purports to allow the user to listen to a theme song from a given series but links them instead to a retail cum community site. Links have been added from a /16 range owned by Windstream Communications but the edits have been usually the only ones to come from a given address. treelo radda  23:48, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Accounts
 * ✅--Hu12 (talk) 17:12, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

palmedazur.com
palmedazur.com - Repeated additions to Cannes since years. This is a commercial lodging website added by IP users. Just reverted an addition. Here a number of warnings to an IP address. Vincent Lextrait (talk) 09:37, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Accounts


 * Seems to have going on since as far as April 08, perhaps further ✅ --Hu12 (talk) 16:32, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

articlesbase.com
articlesbase.com is a website where anyone can add an article. It's used by quite a lot of our articles and after seeing that not only are the webpages chock full of ads, the articles themselves are mainlya advertisements for various services with links to those - I found this one only a few minutes and that was the last straw. I could probably add it myself but don't want to get it wrong! We have been discussing it at RSN - and it was suggested that it be added to Xlinkbot. Dougweller (talk) 16:50, 8 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Several concerns. While authors ar not outright paid for their submitions, the site does monetize itself via usung Adsense (pub-5157679868954075). Does not seem to have any editorial oversite for fact-checking or accuracy.
 * articlesbase.com articles fail Wikipedia's core content policies;
 * ”Verifiability”
 * ” Questionable_sources”
 * "Verifiable Reliable Sources"
 * ”Self-published sources (online and paper)”
 * ”Reliable sources”
 * ”Self-published sources”
 * Considering both the above and the discussion on RSN... --Hu12 (talk) 16:51, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

ricardoaschfotos.com
ricardoaschfotos.com - Repeated additions to Ricardo Asch, promotional site being added by IPs and new users. Risker (talk) 04:03, 26 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Yep, this domain and some related (a wordpress). Consider .  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 05:34, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

aboutmyarea.co.uk
A number of newly registered editors have added this site to Wikipedia at around the same time on October 6th, making me think that they may be working together e.g. the local website editors have received a message on their forum saying something like "why not add your site to wikipedia".

Here are some examples:
 * - adding to Minehead
 * - adding to Hutingdon
 * - adding to Buckden, Cambridgeshire
 * - adding to Neston This user, by her own admission, is the editor of local content on this external link. The editor has already reverted my removal of the link twice and has engaged in lengthy discussion on my talk page. I have politely pointed the editor to both WP:ELNO and WP:COI.
 * - adding to Ayr
 * - adding to Gosforth

This site was previously patrolled by Shadowbot/Antispambot. I suggest it is added to this bot to stop this spamming. --Simple Bob (talk) 06:27, 8 October 2009 (UTC)


 * . Was this not previously even blacklisted?  It has been a problem before, and maybe got taken off the blacklist?  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 07:40, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Now also back on spam blacklist, can't find reason for removal. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 07:51, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Nice one. Thanks. --Simple Bob (talk) 08:23, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

forgetthetalkies.com and rudolphvalentino.org

 * - originally added her blog, forgetthetalkies.com to myriad articles. Forgetthetalkies.com is actually hosted on blogger.com with the specific name purchased. It was taken to WP:NOR/N and the response was that her self-published blog was considered original research and therefore inappropriate. It was taken to WP:RS/N here where the response was that the site does not meet WP:RS criteria. The links were removed but returned multiple times, both by the named account and from a variety of IPs in ranges beginning around the 75. range, and again removed. I ran a random check last night and discovered the links had once again been returned, as well as a new website, rudolphvalentino.org. In checking through the site, it was noted the site was owned and run by the same person as the forgetthetalkies.com, as well as a site called halapickford.com, although that site was not noted on Wikipedia. These links are being used both as external sites and as references. However, some of these links have since been returned, despite having been determined inappropriate by WP:NOR/N AND WP:RS/N. This is getting to be too much to track and deal with. Wildhartlivie (talk) 07:14, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * - originally added her blog, forgetthetalkies.com to myriad articles. Forgetthetalkies.com is actually hosted on blogger.com with the specific name purchased. It was taken to WP:NOR/N and the response was that her self-published blog was considered original research and therefore inappropriate. It was taken to WP:RS/N here where the response was that the site does not meet WP:RS criteria. The links were removed but returned multiple times, both by the named account and from a variety of IPs in ranges beginning around the 75. range, and again removed. I ran a random check last night and discovered the links had once again been returned, as well as a new website, rudolphvalentino.org. In checking through the site, it was noted the site was owned and run by the same person as the forgetthetalkies.com, as well as a site called halapickford.com, although that site was not noted on Wikipedia. These links are being used both as external sites and as references. However, some of these links have since been returned, despite having been determined inappropriate by WP:NOR/N AND WP:RS/N. This is getting to be too much to track and deal with. Wildhartlivie (talk) 07:14, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * - originally added her blog, forgetthetalkies.com to myriad articles. Forgetthetalkies.com is actually hosted on blogger.com with the specific name purchased. It was taken to WP:NOR/N and the response was that her self-published blog was considered original research and therefore inappropriate. It was taken to WP:RS/N here where the response was that the site does not meet WP:RS criteria. The links were removed but returned multiple times, both by the named account and from a variety of IPs in ranges beginning around the 75. range, and again removed. I ran a random check last night and discovered the links had once again been returned, as well as a new website, rudolphvalentino.org. In checking through the site, it was noted the site was owned and run by the same person as the forgetthetalkies.com, as well as a site called halapickford.com, although that site was not noted on Wikipedia. These links are being used both as external sites and as references. However, some of these links have since been returned, despite having been determined inappropriate by WP:NOR/N AND WP:RS/N. This is getting to be too much to track and deal with. Wildhartlivie (talk) 07:14, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, goes on. .  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 07:41, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

www.dragonsword.com


A fansite for a 1995 computer game, Master of Magic. The site does not have encylopaedic content that is not already covered by the article. Basically, it is a gameguide site with fluff (gregarious ingame information) and "discoveries and tips by players of the game"; hence, this site does not qualify for addition under WP:EL. Spammers, using various IPs, keep trying to add it as "official" site at various intervals, such that it is not yet of a degree (the rate of spam or extent across the project) to blacklist it. Reverts of their spam have been explained in the edit summaries, but are unheeded.
 * Accounts


 * Spams to Master of Magic:
 * 19:52, 15 June 2009 20:07, 16 June 2009 02:54, 5 November 2009 04:21, 7 November 2009

Since it is a slow spam and dedicated to a single page, this would not seem to be regarded for blacklisting yet. Semi-protection would also do no good due to the slow rate of insertions, and the situation does not seem to warrant warnings/blocks to IPs. Jappalang (talk) 02:14, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Hasn't re-occured since this report, I'll mark this as, for now--Hu12 (talk) 18:06, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

donghyunchoi.com
Repeatedly added by sockpuppets of indef-blocked editor. The article Dong Hyun Choi itself was deleted at AfD and salted. No legitimate reason to insert --- the website itself is linked to a complex BLP hoax all over the internet (fake facebook accounts, astroturfing forum posts, etc.) See Sockpuppet investigations/Yoland83/Archive for more information. Thanks. cab (talk) 18:08, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Accounts adding
 * ✅--Hu12 (talk) 18:10, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

railay.us


railay.co.uk was added to the revertlist so now they've made themselves a mirror at railay.us and have started spamming that link instead: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Railay_Beach&action=historysubmit&diff=335117067&oldid=333609516 --Jorunn (talk) 02:28, 1 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Worthy of, simple. --Beetstra (public) (Dirk BeetstraT  C on public computers) 14:59, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Blacklisting...✅--Hu12 (talk) 06:22, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

flavortownusa.com and its fan site


Blogs being repeatedly added to Diners, Drive-Ins, and Dives by multiple anonymous IP addresses over time with a recent barrage of persistent spamming. This has been going on since July, as can be seen with this diff. --132 20:39, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Accounts
 * . Thanks for the report, thirteen squared.--Hu12 (talk) 00:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * . Thanks for the report, thirteen squared.--Hu12 (talk) 00:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * . Thanks for the report, thirteen squared.--Hu12 (talk) 00:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * . Thanks for the report, thirteen squared.--Hu12 (talk) 00:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * . Thanks for the report, thirteen squared.--Hu12 (talk) 00:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * . Thanks for the report, thirteen squared.--Hu12 (talk) 00:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * . Thanks for the report, thirteen squared.--Hu12 (talk) 00:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * . Thanks for the report, thirteen squared.--Hu12 (talk) 00:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * . Thanks for the report, thirteen squared.--Hu12 (talk) 00:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * . Thanks for the report, thirteen squared.--Hu12 (talk) 00:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

sginup to


Presumably there's some kind of referral bounty for signups, as the signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=whatever keeps getting the whatever changed. Oddly enough, you can sign up without the ref=whatever being set, so a regex to detect the ref= part being there is all that's needed. Examples:   Josh Parris 02:42, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:12, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Famous Food Finder


This is an alternate of previously blacklisted links (discussion on their removal can be found two convos above or here). It's also being spammed on several other Food Network related articles. Thank you. --132 17:59, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 132 .. .. no need to do it here, this is pushing abuse a step to far.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 15:06, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

shanegujrat.com




--Jorunn (talk) 18:08, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:12, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

petitionspot.com
Petition site. MER-C 09:26, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Should be blacklisted (many are), . --Dirk Beetstra T  C 15:07, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

justia.com
MER-C 10:33, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
 * --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:09, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

potatoricer.org.uk


Multiple IPs involved (see history of ), one of the main targets.

A recent post by (one of the involved IPs) suggests this is a an "experiment" or a game to them. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:49, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * MER-C 11:54, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

ehotfun.com and espikegirls.com


Indian "babes blogs" repeatedly linkspammed by:



and anon-ips. -- Rrburke (talk) 18:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Some block evasion going on here... MER-C 02:18, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

articlediary.com
See for IP addresses and diffs. Latest:. See Data mining history for users with IP 122.173.*.* for frequent re-additions of this link.

Since the contributions usually come from IPs, I figure XLinkBot could handle this instead of the local blacklist? --Chire2 (talk) 07:39, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I would think this is blacklistable. MER-C 12:29, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
 * This was blacklisted. MER-C 02:31, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Where? Can't find it. --Chire (talk) 23:28, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, articlediary.com isn't blacklisted. But some domains did get blacklisted because of your report. MER-C 05:28, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

MER-C 05:06, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

14gaam.com
Spammed community site. --Ronz (talk) 22:19, 26 May 2010 (UTC)


 * MER-C 05:33, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

liggettron.com
This site has been repeatedly spammed by, which is incidentally an IP address registered to the same domain, in the mistaken belief that it contains content that people will find useful and informative. User continues to add the site despite repeated warnings.
 * for the same reason at the spam blacklist. IP has promised to stop, if it continues it will be blocked for a long time. MER-C 09:16, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

glasspaint.com
This site has been spammed repeatedly by multiple IP's and a registered user. Some diffs: Thanks! Jminthorne (talk) 20:22, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 


 * MER-C 08:35, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

gcaptain.com
Site is systematically adding links through articles related to ships. Site fails WP:ELNO #10 and #11. I also posted a request at the blacklist. H aus Talk 19:20, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * MER-C 12:38, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Link deleted citing this bot on MV_Maersk_Alabama was reverted []. The deleted link was relevant and not spam. The justification given above was WP:ELNO. WP:ELNO says: "The subject of this guideline is external links that are not citations to sources supporting article content." The deleted link was a citation. I hope this bot is not deleting citations randomly using guidelines related to External Links. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 19:06, 17 June 2010 (UTC)


 * XLinkBot is written to revert external links, and does its best not to detect whether links are references, and then does not revert. And I don't understand your 'randomly', maybe you want to read through the bots BRFA's.  Just as a not, WP:ELNO #10 and #11 are related to forums and blogs respectively, which generally fail our external links guidelines.  Forums and blogs, however, are also largely not accepted as references (they are generally NOT reliable), and I do believe therefor that these 'references' should be considered as such.  The value of a sentence without a reference is about the same as a sentence with a reference to some blog post: not a lot!
 * Seen that this sourcing is mainly done by a handful of IPs, and that there are hardly any regulars that use this, I would call this plain WP:SPAM and WP:REFSPAM. You might want to reconsider your reversion.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 20:39, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I see now that an editor hot linked to this entry in his edit summary whilst manually deleting the reference on MV_Maersk_Alabama. That confused me. Sorry, I now know it wasn't the bot that did the deletion and I am happy. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 21:32, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I have reverted the removal of material I added to Lake freighter more than a year ago. No user named gcaptain has ever edited the page and the linked material is relevant. Rmhermen (talk) 23:06, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * i don't understand why all of the gcaptain references are being deleted that are not El's. --emerson7 04:23, 18 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, you will have to ask the editor who does that. But as I have argued elsewhere:
 * I said that gcaptain.com is a forum and a blog, forums and blogs fail our [WP:EL|external links guidelines]], specifically WP:ELNO #10 and #11.
 * I said that gcaptain.com is a forum and a blog, forums and blogs fail our reliable sources guidelines. Forums and blogs do not have the necessary editorial oversight, they are self published.
 * Regarding 'No user named gcaptain has ever edited the page and the linked material is relevant', I have not said it was not relevant, I said that it failed, generally, WP:EL and WP:RS.
 * Gcaptain was one of the accounts, a couple of years ago. However, by far the most of the additions are by IPs, and hardly any regulars use the site, not as an external link, nor as a reference.  I am afraid that quite some of the IP additions are also spammy.
 * That being said, there has been some regular use of the link, either in good faith, or by regulars. But if we have editors who seriously spam this site, then XLinkBot is a first, cleaning external links and references which are not suitable to assert the material they should is a second, and maybe in the end blacklisting and specific whitelisting is in the end a solution.  Lets see how XLinkBot can keep up with the spammers, and see if it stops (I did however remark that I would think that blacklisting is a good idea).  I hope this explains.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 05:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

shrinedstars.com


Spam by several single-purpose accounts and IPs made throughout several pages, including         , etc. —  ξ xplicit  23:05, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks like a raid by a board which shall remain nameless. MER-C 09:09, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

=Proposed removals=

Encyclopedia of Alabama

 * The Encyclopedia of Alabama is a peer-reviewed online educational resource published by the Alabama Humanities Foundation covering topics related to Alabama history and culture. Linking to EofA articles from Wikipedia would normally be appropriate under the guidelines of WP:EL (Specifically, Item 3 under "What should be linked"). In some cases it would be better to incorporate EofA content into WP's article and use it as a reference rather than an external link, but that judgment should not be made by an automated script. --Dystopos (talk) 17:25, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Absolutely, and established editors can use it. However, creating sockpuppets and pushing the link in also inappropriate places has forced us to put it here at least until the accounts starts using it properly.  Also keeping an eye on WP:COI, WP:NOT or WP:NOT is a place here.  And the intro of WP:EL clearly states that ".. If the website or page to which you want to link includes information that is not yet a part of the article, consider using it as a source for the article, and citing it. Guidelines for sourcing, which includes external links used as citations, are discussed at Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Citing sources. .."
 * And seen the edits of the accounts (I have expanded on that elsewhere), I would just use rollback anyway. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 11:31, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


 * See also Suspected_sock_puppets/Encyclopediaofalabama. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 11:33, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't see how the well-meaning but poorly-handled actions by those users have "forced" you to place the site on a blacklist. In my opinion when the site is clearly an authoritative, non-commercial, informational resource, more harm is done by blocking it (not biting newbies and assuming good faith are still policy, too) than by accepting the minor violations of WP:EL (a style guideline without the force of official policy). --Dystopos (talk) 13:27, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


 * This bot is not blocking it, it is, at least at the first edit, inviting users to discuss using an, IMHO, not biting message. That a site is non commercial, informational etc. does not mean that its additions can be done in a more appropriate way.  The user was asked to discuss early on, yet continued in block evasion and, later, sock puppetry.  The first 2 accounts were reverted by 3 different long-term editors, giving in total more than 8 messages asking the editor to discuss.  I have evaluated the links, where they were placed, and how they were placed, and believe me, there certainly were enough reasons for concern, and this user clearly ignored those concerns.  The user now, after probably something like 15-20 warnings, finally started to discuss.  That is for me more reason to consider to remove it then 'this is not spam, it does not belong on this list'.  I have been around in this field for a long time, and have seen boths sides of the medal here.  Some contributors indeed make a 'mistake' early on, but start to discuss and have become valuable and respected editors, some never got it, and although editors who are part of respected organisations only were here to promote themselves and their organisation, not to write an encyclopedia.  I hope this explains.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 13:59, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I had a look, my concerns included inappropriate placing (top of list, not used as a reference), adding the link to already long lists, adding the link to pages where it certainly did not belong, breaking formatting. And as I said, the user was asked over and over to discuss.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 14:10, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I have removed the rule now the user is discussing. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 14:26, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

www.los40principales.com.ar
Pretty simple: I screwed up when reading the AFD. www.los40principales.com.ar was the URL of the good chart, being used to contrast to the bad Argentinian chart.&mdash;Kww(talk) 03:56, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm .. still, many of the additions are by IPs in two ranges: 12 records; Editors who have added los40principales.com.ar: 201.252.170.45 (2), AVBOT (2), 200.117.198.204 (1), (1), 190.246.24.71 (1), 190.246.11.229 (1), (1), 200.69.209.188 (1), 190.84.146.176 (1), BOTpolicia (1).
 * For as far as I know, the two bots are anti virus vandalism bots, so I don't see many regulars using this link. Should be fine on the list.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 10:57, 28 November 2008 (UTC)