Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2008 Archive Jul 2

arkansasties.com

 * Link
 * Account
 * Account

Aggressive linkspamming, still needs cleanup and/or dealing with. (I assume y'all have some tools or scripts for dealing with a big mess like this.) Kelly  hi! 22:13, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Park West Gallery: our article vs. The New York Times'
After reading a long New York Times article today, "Art Auctions on Cruise Ships Lead to Anger, Accusations and Lawsuits", I was curious to see if we had an article. In fact we do: a slickly pretty article complete with "refs" and good compliance to our Manual of Style … it's also a blatantly promotional PR piece.


 * Accounts:
 * See this image licensing comment; the image is by Park West Gallery and Sorlando holds the copyright
 * See this image licensing comment; the image is by Park West Gallery and Sorlando holds the copyright
 * See this image licensing comment; the image is by Park West Gallery and Sorlando holds the copyright

Articles with some evidence of COI-editing: Note that some of these artists are probably notable; the articles in some cases appear to have been added as vehicles for links various Park West domains.
 * Articles:
 * Andrew Bone
 * Tomasz Rut
 * Scott Jacobs
 * Jean-Claude Picot
 * Anatole Krasnyansky
 * Park West Galleries
 * Park west gallery
 * Park West Gallery
 * deleted once before
 * Charles Lee (artist)
 * Alfred Gockel
 * deleted twice


 * Presently linked from Wikipedia articles:
 * http://cruiseshipartgallery.com
 * http://parkwestauctions.net
 * http://park-west-gallery.info
 * http://park-west-gallery.net
 * http://parkwest-picot.com
 * http://parkwestfoundation.com
 * http://parkwestgallery.com
 * http://parkwest-picot.com
 * http://parkwestfoundation.com
 * http://parkwestgallery.com
 * http://parkwestfoundation.com
 * http://parkwestgallery.com
 * http://parkwestgallery.com


 * Related domains:
 * http://cruiseartauctions.com
 * http://cruiseartgallery.com
 * http://cruiseshipart.biz
 * http://cruiseshipart.info
 * http://cruiseshipart.net
 * http://cruiseshipartauctions.com
 * http://cruisingwithart.com
 * http://parkwestart.com
 * http://parkwestartatsea.com
 * http://parkwestauction.net
 * http://parkwestauction.org
 * http://parkwestauctions.biz
 * http://parkwestauctions.com
 * http://parkwestauctions.info
 * http://parkwest-bellet.com
 * http://parkwest-bone.com
 * http://parkwestgalleriestestimonials.com
 * http://parkwestgallery.biz
 * http://park-west-gallery.biz
 * http://park-west-gallery.com
 * http://parkwestgallery.info
 * http://parkwest-lekinff.com
 * http://parkwest-markus.com
 * http://parkwesttravel.com
 * http://plymouthauctioneering.com
 * http://pwgart.biz
 * http://pwgart.com
 * http://pwgart.net
 * http://pwgatsea.com
 * http://pwgauctions.biz
 * http://pwgauctions.com
 * http://shipart.net
 * http://shipartauctions.com
 * http://parkwestgallery.biz
 * http://park-west-gallery.biz
 * http://park-west-gallery.com
 * http://parkwestgallery.info
 * http://parkwest-lekinff.com
 * http://parkwest-markus.com
 * http://parkwesttravel.com
 * http://plymouthauctioneering.com
 * http://pwgart.biz
 * http://pwgart.com
 * http://pwgart.net
 * http://pwgatsea.com
 * http://pwgauctions.biz
 * http://pwgauctions.com
 * http://shipart.net
 * http://shipartauctions.com
 * http://pwgart.biz
 * http://pwgart.com
 * http://pwgart.net
 * http://pwgatsea.com
 * http://pwgauctions.biz
 * http://pwgauctions.com
 * http://shipart.net
 * http://shipartauctions.com
 * http://pwgauctions.biz
 * http://pwgauctions.com
 * http://shipart.net
 * http://shipartauctions.com
 * http://shipart.net
 * http://shipartauctions.com
 * http://shipartauctions.com
 * http://shipartauctions.com

Relationship uncertain: -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 00:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Possibly related domains:
 * http://artcollectorsforum.net
 * http://artcultureandbooks.com
 * http://seaartauctions.com
 * http://artsmart101.wordpress.com
 * http://www.gallerywatch.net
 * http://www.artsmart101.com
 * http://aboutfineartregistry.com
 * http://fineartregistryscam.blogspot.com
 * http://www.gallerywatch.net
 * http://www.artsmart101.com
 * http://aboutfineartregistry.com
 * http://fineartregistryscam.blogspot.com
 * http://aboutfineartregistry.com
 * http://fineartregistryscam.blogspot.com
 * http://fineartregistryscam.blogspot.com


 * More domains previously linked:
 * See this message thread.
 * http://tomaszrut.com
 * http://charlesleefineart.com
 * http://gockelfineart.com
 * http://gockelfineart.com
 * http://gockelfineart.com


 * Additional related domains
 * See this message thread.
 * http://andrewbone.com
 * http://barnhartfineart.com
 * http://chenfineart.com
 * http://dcota.com
 * http://dopicofineart.com
 * http://grossfineart.com
 * http://hollandfineart.com
 * http://macfineart.com
 * http://macfineartgallery.com
 * http://markofineart.com
 * http://maximfineart.com
 * http://peternixonfineart.com
 * http://scottjacobsfineart.com
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * http://macfineart.com
 * http://macfineartgallery.com
 * http://markofineart.com
 * http://maximfineart.com
 * http://peternixonfineart.com
 * http://scottjacobsfineart.com
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * http://peternixonfineart.com
 * http://scottjacobsfineart.com
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * http://scottjacobsfineart.com
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * This one is more of an article-spam/conflict of interest issue than a linkspam problem. Also, the spammed articles that have not been deleted are about subjects that are probably notable; they should be reworked rather than deleted. On second thought, I'm going to refer this to the Conflict of Interest Noticeboard -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 12:26, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

sfbsc.com
Went and removed a large collection of links from the above site all over the place. the culprit is a bath salt company and by and large one user has been dropping the link all over the place as a reference rather than external linkspam. After further review, I wanted to seek the learned counsel here. My conundrum is in that the site in question contains a lot of articles, some reprinted from other sources, some original and, in my opinion, unreliable self serving articles. In some cases they may legimately act as a reference. Some of the links were more clearly spamvertising. In a lot of cases, when a user is legitimately trying to add content in good faith, I let these go. But the large number of links from one person led me down the removal path.

Anyway, looking for a second opinion if anyone has the chance to review a couple of the edits. If you folks deem that I went overboard, I may go and replace any that I removed.



User:

Left my diffs out here.
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 

Thanks.

Montco (talk) 03:22, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

You know what, I have changed my mind as there are more involved in this. There is more spam here than I earlier thought.

Montco (talk) 01:29, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

spam.jiffylubeca.com
Account seems to exist with the sole intent of promoting

Very first edit deleted a redirect to put in an advert

Caomhin (talk) 09:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

spam.oilcarsandmotors.com + spam.tenssolution.com
AdSense site (ID: pub-4950844345084381) adding multiple ELs to relevant articles, including duplicate external content to other ELs.

Edits by:

Caomhin (talk) 09:27, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Repeated abuse of spam.oilcarsandmotors.com - Caomhin (talk) 10:11, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

spam.widman.biz
Blovian website (Spanish language) scattered across articles, typically with multiple entries per article.

Warned:

Caomhin (talk) 10:21, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.reegle.info http://spam.reeep.org



 * Spammers

MER-C 13:40, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.savethewildup.org/

 * Link


 * Accounts

This appears to be additions by a user who is mistaking WikiPedia for a bulletin board (their only edits have been to add this link to three articles). I have placed a uw-spam1 warning on the user's talk page and have reverted the postings of the link from the articles. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 14:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

spam.cheapsneakersb2b.com

 * Site spammed


 * Spammer


 * diff

Siawase (talk) 14:23, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Prolific Internet-wide linkspammer whose very disruptive pattern here has been to spam a spammy paragraph into the middle of unrelated pages. Given the disruption, we should blacklist this domain now rather than wait for the normal sequence of warnings.


 * (and discuss at Meta for possible global blacklisting) -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 13:25, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

spam.dbrmfg.co.nz



 * Editors
 * - SPA, 26 December 2007
 * - SPA, 5 March 2008
 * - SPA, 15 April 2008
 * - SPA, 14 May 2008
 * - SPA, 14 May 2008
 * - SPA, 17 July 2008
 * - SPA, 17 July 2008
 * - SPA, 17 July 2008
 * - SPA, 17 July 2008
 * - SPA, 17 July 2008
 * I've given them all warnings on the 17th. Some appeared and restored the links after I gave the warnings.  There is no indication that they've seen the warnings, so I've made the edit summaries more noticeable.  --Ronz (talk) 15:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * has responded to the warnings and is a bit confused at this point about the links being removed because of the spamming behavior with which they were added. At least we're finally discussing the issue now. --Ronz (talk) 14:53, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the discussions have gone well, and I don't expect there will be any further problems. --Ronz (talk) 15:42, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Bot wishlist
Would it be possible to program a bot to flag new edits containing ® or ™?

In my experience, they almost always flag either a spam edit or a copyright violation.

Thanks, -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:40, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * WP:BOTREQ is where this should go. Gary King ( talk ) 08:17, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Request opinions on petitionspot.com

 * Link

I saw this linked fron NetZero, and to me it's a violation of both WP:NOT and WP:NOT as it's an active solicitation for names on a petition - I I removed the link.

However, when I did an external link search on the site, I found several existing uses of the link. I wanted to get other opinions about the appropriateness of thse links before I began removing these. After a casual glance, many appear to be on discussion pages (not a big deal), and a handful appear to be appropriate to the article - but there are several remaining that I would still question. So ... what is the general opinion on appropriateness of linking to this site? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:56, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Typical case for a link which should be on XLinkBot, I think. We have petitiononline.com on there (although I believe that one is now even blacklisted somewhere).  They are very often a problem, although there are indeed sometimes some proper uses.
 * I have regenerated the COIBot report, it does not get added much, I have 51 records in about 10 months now (and quite some of them are vandalism reversions, apparently). I vote to add it to XLinkBot.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 16:02, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I've noticed this before, but I don't think I ever got around to following up on it. Even if it's not spam, too often inappropriate per WP:EL. --Ronz (talk) 16:07, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * That's how XLinkBot is defined .. 'unwanted links and spam'. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 16:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Given the feedback, I would support adding it to XLinkBot - it seems a good fit for that bot's function. Is there another forum to which requests should be posted, or is posting to this talk page sufficient to have links added to XLinkBot? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * FYI: It was re-added to the NetZero article, and I re-removed it. I also started a discussion on the article's talk page - but the same problems with the link to the solicitation remains. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:08, 20 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I have added it to XLinkBot. The problem is similar to petitiononline.com.  Re 'Is there another forum to which requests should be posted, or is posting to this talk page sufficient to have links added to XLinkBot?', links can be added if there is proof of inappropriate use of links by IPs/unestablished accounts (this includes spamming of the links, but it can also be that there are too often other concerns with the link, or just that it gets pushed).  If you are unsure, discuss it either here on WT:WPSPAM or on User:XLinkBot/RevertList requests, and when consensus is there, add it to the revertlist, and log it linking to a permanent version of the discussion (see 'permanent link' in the toolbox).  If you have proof, then there is no need to discuss extensively, just add the rule to the revertlist.  Adding it to XLinkBot early keeps us from a lot of work in the end.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 09:02, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Weebly sites
I came across this link today and came up with about 130 links, mostly to nn personal/info sites. I didn't see any systematic addition, but wanted some feedback as I couldn't find a discussion elsewhere. Weebly is a new website creation site. Flowanda | Talk 16:41, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.mmohub.org/

 * Link


 * Account

Appears to be a single-purpose account adding subpages from within the same site to multiple articles (game review site). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:22, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

http://www.findingdulcinea.com



 * Editors


 * There's some spamming going on with this website. I'd like to hear what others think of it as an external link in general. --Ronz (talk) 22:40, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * All links to it appear to be to summaries and links to the full articles elsewhere - it doesn't appear to publish anything itself. To me, the site fails WP:ELNO #9.  Also, the site itself is not a WP:RS - so shouldn't be used as a ref (although some of the articles to which it links are to sites which are reliable sources - so the refs should be updated to point to the true target site). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 23:19, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It doesn't help that there seems to be a systematic addition of links:
 * It doesn't help that there seems to be a systematic addition of links:



And it's being used as a source with no indication that it meets WP:RS. All of the staff listed seem to be marketing people; I see no indication of journalistic background or experience that would indicate editorial oversight or judgment.

And its company article was deleted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dulcinea_Media%2C_Inc The discussion indicates there were many more links before its deletion.Flowanda | Talk 23:32, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yep. Thanks for the help! --Ronz (talk) 23:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I just went through and cleared out a bunch more links. Some appear to have been new since the last time I did so, others were either missed or restored. It's noteworthy that has admitted] that at least three people from the company have gone through adding links. DreamGuy (talk) 20:12, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I've tried it as well, but they just got reverted and I was told I was "wrecking pages". I guess some people prefer linkspam. --SmashvilleBONK! 23:20, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Open your eyes. All the staff is marketing people???...Take a look at their bios, 90% of the staff are writer or editors with decades of experience. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Levi5919 (talk • contribs) 21:04, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Which would in no way justify spamming Wikipedia with links either way. DreamGuy (talk) 21:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

If it quacks like a spammer ... I vet Barek's assessment of failing WP:ELNO #9, and this discussion (currently there are no links from articlespace) indicates a #4 as well. - Eldereft (cont.) 01:12, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Agarwood
Hafizmuar keeps turning into a personal webspace for his business. Check the history for diffs, as they abound. He's been warned multiple times. ~ Wakanda's Black Panther! &spades; / &diams; 07:42, 20 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment by Althena (talk): Here is some other relevant info that Anjay posted on my talk page when I asked him for help dealing with this user:
 * (written by User:Avnjay: Hello Althena! I'm not actually an admin but I can help you out! I've just been over every edit Hafizmuar has made, which have all been to do with the Agarwood article. Some of the edits, such as this one are ok, if lacking in sources. However, as you say a large number of them are adding spam about a company or a person (also here and in many other places). Other of his edits have been to replace large sections of material with a version which is unreferenced and not quite so encyclopaedic although containing new information, such as here. On Wikipedia though we always try and assume good faith. Therefore, we will assume that Hafizmuar is unaware of what he has been doing wrong and explain it to him on his talk page, which I will do immediately after this post. This might seem a cop out but it is part of Wikipedia's policy to be as gentle as possible! It is, however, also a necessary first step before a User conduct request for comment can be filed, which could be the next step should the edits continue. Because his edits aren't purely and obviously vandalism it would be inappropriate to list at WP:AIV.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Althena (talk • contribs) 09:28, 20 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I posted a gentle but firm message on his Talk page explaining the situation and trying to help him out but sadly it was just ignored and then removed. Although spamming is the obvious thing that Hafizmuar is doing he also is showing a total lack of regard for other editors and severe ownership of the Agarwood article. But maybe we should deal with one thing at a time and see what the consensus is here first! A v nj a y Talk 14:56, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.hyundaiownersclub.co.uk

 * Spammers

MER-C 12:41, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.learnislamicfinance.com

 * Spammers

MER-C 12:54, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

spam.celebrityphotos.tv
AdSense: pub-9615851509563764

EL added to the only 2 articles they have pages for, expecting more abuse.

Caomhin (talk) 06:48, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

spam.opik.superhosting.bg/~aerobati
It's the aerobatic team spammer again.


 * Previous incidents
 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2008 Archive Feb 1
 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2008 Archive Feb 1
 * MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/March 2008
 * MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2008/06


 * Sites spammed


 * Spammers

MER-C 12:27, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Oriana Naso
As is shown by these diffs: this this this this this this this this it appears that this is a SPA spamming for Standpoint (magazine)  almost - instinct 16:05, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.shinydonuts.com/

 * links


 * Accounts


 * Google ad-sense ID: 8918613829163025 (appears on multiple, but not all URLs that have been added)

This appears to be an effort by WP:SPAs to add links to these two sites to multiple article, either by multiple IPs or a user who changes their IP frequently. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:14, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Marvel: Ultimate Alliance 2 page hacked
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvel_Ultimate_Alliance_2:_Fusion

Someone screwed it up pretty bad. I don't know how to fix it... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.246.248.34 (talk • contribs) 22:18, July 21, 2008
 * I don't see any obvious issues with the page, can you define "screwed it up"? If the formatting is mangled, it may just be on your end.  Try reloading the page (hold "Ctrl" while clicking on "refresh" or "reload"). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:24, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Powerlevelling spam
The IP address has apparently spammed a variety of links related to selling gold such as. JoshuaZ (talk) 05:16, 22 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Spam pages


 * Sites spammed


 * Related domains
 * probably more...
 * probably more...
 * probably more...
 * probably more...
 * probably more...
 * probably more...
 * probably more...
 * probably more...
 * probably more...


 * Spammers

MER-C 06:57, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.semiconductor-today.com

 * Spammers

Now on XLinkBot. MER-C 12:36, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

spam.rightpundits.com
AdSense:pub-2980406795136945

Junk links/refs to this blog are being added by - appears to be a sole purpose account.

Caomhin (talk) 09:06, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Possible linked accounts:



Caomhin (talk) 09:49, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Craigrobinson41
AdSense: pub-1579012953270282 AdSense: pub-6590449011170262

Links added:

Already seen/reported as an IP user: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2008_Archive_May_1

Caomhin (talk) 10:13, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

spam.mmmp.org

 * Spammers
 * Cross-wiki spammer, see.
 * Cross-wiki spammer, see.
 * Cross-wiki spammer, see.


 * Spammer moved links up.
 * Spammer moved links up.


 * Cross-wiki spammer, see it:Special:Contributions/Mocellins.
 * Cross-wiki spammer, see it:Special:Contributions/Mocellins.

On first glance, there's some potentially useful content, but it's clearly been spammed. Blacklist? MER-C 10:25, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.travel-picture-blog.com

 * Spammers

MER-C 11:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

www.celsias.com
I don't know enough about the subject to judge the relevance here, but one user's been adding links to the same site to the global warming pages (here). The only link I clicked on was certainly relevant to the article ("The Great Global Warming Swindle"), but it was a reprint of content available elsewhere. N p holmes (talk) 07:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.repeatfanzine.co.uk

 * Spammers

MER-C 13:58, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Odd inclusion
WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/seattle.gov. The official city government web site. It's not surprising that someone with "Seattle" in his user name had occasion to reference it. It's an extensive and useful city gov't web site. Is there some way it can be dropped from the monitored list? Clearly not a problem. - Jmabel | Talk 19:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

chipy100
Keep an eye out for him, cause he was repeatedly adding links to VidSerp (which he claims he was the creator on his own now being db-spamed page.) to pages about video searching. Watch out. ViperSnake151 14:40, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Link info follows. MER-C 03:32, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.vidserp.com

Adsense pub-3719549946222041

 * Spam pages

http://spam.stomastomata.com http://spam.imbd.tv http://spam.freepsychicchatonline.org
 * Sites spammed


 * Spammers
 * (shared IP)
 * (shared IP)

MER-C 12:54, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

spam.ebizq.net


Promotional links, ad-infested site. --CliffC (talk) 00:29, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

spam.prs-500formatter.com/

 * Account


 * Link


 * Related URL

Only one user appears involved so far, but he's persistent, and has re-added the commercial link despite warnings (the first of which he blanked from his talk page immediately after re-adding the link - which confirms that he saw the warning message). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:00, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: User continues to restore the commercial link. This appears to be a WP:SPA - their sole edits have been to restore the link. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:24, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Update: The user attempted to blank this entry. I've also found that the original link that the user would post (prs505.com) is now blacklisted. They are attempting to circumvent the block by using the prs-500formatter.com address.  --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:40, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

relevantsearchscotland.co.uk and ayrshirescotland.com

 * Accounts:


 * Link:


 * Related links:


 * Ad-sense account (on both domains above):
 * ca-pub-0249863214531455

Can someone else take a look at these links? The parent URL appears to be a search consolidator or travel site of some sort. The ship information is marginally useful, but to me would be more appropriate as a ref rather than an EL; but in most cases it is redundant to information already cited for references, so not needed. I'm interrested in other opinions before I do anything with more of these links. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:30, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The only accounts that have added this link to Wikipedia have done no other editing so it does look like spam. However some of the links have remained on the pages for a couple of years and gone through one or more revisions of the external links list so regular editors have seen the link and appear to have considered it worth keeping on several occasions.  The link has been removed from a a few other pages so there's no consensus that it's always a good link.  I personally think, at least for the cruise ship articles, that the site gives little information that isn't readily available at other links provided.  I can't see how it could be used as a ref - there's nothing about the site that suggests it could be considered a reliable source for this type of information. Perhaps posting to WikiProject Ships will get more knowledgeable input about the value of the link itself and the input of informed editors on which pages it is actually valuable.  Given its longevity on some pages, simply cleaning it out without a heads up could lead to unnecessary drama. -- SiobhanHansa 09:14, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * You seem to have deleted the link to http://www.relevantsearchscotland.co.uk/ships/255oasisofthedseas.html that contained data on the ships proposed cruise routes. 20th Century Ships is regarded by many ship historians as more than marginally useful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.209.97 (talk) 11:58, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * From which article, and how long ago? Found it on the MS Oasis of the Seas article - it was deleted by another editor with an edit summary saying that the addition added nothing new (nothing not already covered by other ref tags and ELs), so it appears that others beside myself do question the value of the link.  --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 14:33, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Bsdguru

 * Spam/COI link insertion on Bandwidth management, , and.
 * Spam/COI link insertion on Traffic shaping, more examples in history.
 * Spam/COI link insertion on Deep packet inspection.
 * Spam/COI page creation Emerging Technologies Inc.
 * Self acknowledged WP:COI.
 * Sufficiently warned User talk:Bsdguru.
 * Legal threats.
 * Sufficiently warned User talk:Bsdguru.
 * Legal threats.

Dgtsyb (talk) 20:36, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I have indef blocked the account for spam only and the legal threat, and opened an item on WP:ANI.

See also:

--Dirk Beetstra T C 11:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

COIBot still looking for links on this page?
I noticed that the InternetEvolution.com link I reported above on the 21st does not have a COIBot report although User:Paulson74 added links over the last few days (e.g. ). Does COIBot still pull links off this page for monitoring? Is it case sensitive? Have I listed incorrectly? -- SiobhanHansa 11:56, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, it does, but sometimes it floods, and then does not 'see' the edit, and misses it. If you need a report, try User:COIBot/Poke .. the data should be in the database, even if the link is not watched.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 14:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks Dirk. -- SiobhanHansa 15:49, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

aipdaily.com


Reported by Kelly  hi! 14:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Smells fishy - seafish.org
(refactored post, seems not related to sfu.ca and nationalfisherman.com)

--Dirk Beetstra T C 10:13, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Major edits to Sea Fish Industry Authority
 * Major edits to Sea Fish Industry Authority
 * Major edits to Sea Fish Industry Authority
 * Major edits to Sea Fish Industry Authority
 * Major edits to Sea Fish Industry Authority

Smells fishy - sfu.ca
(refactored post, seems not related to seafish.org and nationalfisherman.com)



--Dirk Beetstra T C 10:13, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Smells fishy - nationalfisherman.com
(refactored post, seems not related to seafish.org and sfu.ca)




 * User talk:NatFisherman is naming some other accounts, which I have summarised here above (seafish.org and sfu.org). I do not believe they are related (though timing is strange).


 * OK, shortly after I reverted User:NatFisherman on Deadliest Catch, a new user account is created:




 * who starts editing Deadliest Catch, adding the same link as NatFisherman is doing (nationalfisherman.com), now in a reference (but thereby killing another reference!). Similarly an edit to Alaskan king crab fishing was performed.  It seems that someone is very strongly trying to promote a site.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 15:32, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Towntalk.co.uk

 * - sample diff
 * sole purpose of account seems to be to add these links. As it looks like the web sites have multiples hosts for UK towns it's one to keep an eye out for, especially as they're trying to say they are an "official internet guide" - utter tosh. I've already reverted his/her edits as they continue and ARVed the account. --Blowdart | talk 16:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.networkingboards.com/

 * Link summary and primary IP
 * Entire edit history.
 * Entire edit history.
 * Entire edit history.


 * Related IPs and Users
 * Entire edit history.
 * This one.
 * appears to identify IP address as Cmdeane.
 * appears to identify IP address as Cmdeane.


 * Entire visible edit history and link placed on own user page.
 * User identified as possible COI link insertion by COIBot WikiProject Spam/COIReports/2007, Sep 4 and WikiProject Spam/COIReports/2007, Sep 17.
 * User identified as possible COI link insertion by COIBot WikiProject Spam/COIReports/2007, Sep 4 and WikiProject Spam/COIReports/2007, Sep 17.

Looks like convoluted LINKSPAM and COI spanning years. — Dgtsyb (talk) 01:38, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Possibly related IPs

Cuil
Sorry to spoil your check list but looking for my nickname on cuil I discovered you were talking about me on feb. 13. Well, I figured you might be interested to know that cuil delve pretty well in you logs. I'm probably of topic, it's certainly not limited to spam reports. Iluvalar (talk) 03:38, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

reporting abusive material
Hi i have no idea if this is the right area to report this but i am really discusted by it and have no idea how to fix or edit it. The offencive material appears at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoover_Dam. Many thanks if you can remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.23.185 (talk) 03:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Already dealt with by user User:Caiaffa. Thanks for the heads up.  This isn't strictly the correct place to report this.  I don't think there's a specific noticeboard for vandalism that any editor can correct so the help desk is probably a better place in the future.  It's more likely to have experienced editors watching it at any time of the day or night. But if you're not sure what you're doing, reporting anywhere editors seem to be active will help ensure it gets corrected. -- SiobhanHansa 14:21, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.soaps.com

 * Spammers

Has legitimate uses, but spamming isn't one of them. MER-C 12:52, 30 July 2008 (UTC)