Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2008 Archive Sep 1

German Food Guide
These are basically the same person adding a massive amount of spam links to dozens upon dozens of different articles in rapid succession. JBsupreme (talk) 07:02, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

FLV Players
Two users keep adding links to certain FLV player sites, and moving them to the top of the list multiple times in Flash Video.

Web-anatomy
.

Same ISP; the proprietary player has freeware and commercial versions. All edits from the IP are related to the player.


 * Adding:, , , ;
 * moving: ,
 * replacing other links:, , , , ,.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by AVRS (talk • contribs) 16:44, 5 August 2008 ; 20:06, 6 August 2008 (UTC); 11:22, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Another IP adding this:



--Dirk Beetstra T C 17:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Looked a bit further:
 * (flv-player.)web-anatomy.com resolves to 91.189.136.50, not too far from the IP of the top editor.
 * I am not sure if the latter IP (79.) is related, it is only one edit in which a whole set of links were added/moved. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 17:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

While the main IP is blocked, the link has been added yesterday and corrected today by. --AVRS (talk) 10:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Two blocks, multiple warnings: -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * In looking for some other Flash Video cross-wiki spam, I saw these link on other Wikipedias. I see this spammer has been busy elsewhere:
 * ru:Служебная:Contributions/91.189.141.202
 * de:Spezial:Beiträge/91.189.141.202
 * fr:Special:Contributions/91.189.141.202
 * pl:Specjalna:Wkład/91.189.141.202
 * es:Especial:Contributions/91.189.141.202
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:42, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Now that the IP is blocked for 3 months, and the domain blacklisted on Meta, dynamic IPs in 83.0.0.0/13 or /11 have posted a URL redirect link twice: ,.

The redirect site is:

See m:Talk:Spam_blacklist.

--AVRS (talk) 16:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Rich Media Project
Different ISPs, same country. These commercial-only players may actually be notable, but the user has been moving them to the top of the list, too.


 * Adding: ,
 * moving: ; the only single contributions of 82.124.27.209 and 84.98.130.113.
 * replacing other links:,.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by AVRS (talk • contribs) 16:44, 5 August 2008 ; AVRS (talk) 20:06, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Other users who have been adding this:



--Dirk Beetstra T C 17:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Enough's enough. The spammer has ignored enough warnings and been reverted enough that they should know our rules; they have made it clear they will ignore them. If an established, trusted editor wants to use a link to this site in the future, they can always make a request at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist‎ or leave a note on my talk page.


 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:10, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Now blacklisted. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 22:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Hitasoft
Hosted in Canada.


 * (Almost) the only edits from IPs in India:
 * 
 * (to the Free software section, despite no sign of free license is behind the link)
 * 
 * Registered:
 * — by, who has had and appears to be writing advertisement on their user page right now.

--AVRS (talk) 13:28, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Make sure the spammer gets a warning every time you delete their spam; if this continues, we will blacklist the domain. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello Moderator, This is John From Hitasoft to apology for my mistake... I have gone through the complete rules of Wiki and I wont misuse anything from here after.. Now, I have created a login and post my own wiki... So, i wont misuse any other's wiki from today onwards... My Apologies... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.164.165.229 (talk) 16:46, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

uknationalparks.webs.com

 * Spammers

MER-C 10:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Block next time for sure. Thanks for picking that one up.  Cheers -- Herby  talk thyme 11:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It came back. Another IP here. Blacklisted (✅). -- Herby  talk thyme 09:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.boi-mela.com

 * Spammers

MER-C 12:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * MER-C, there are >50 boi-mela.com links now -- do you know if they were spammed or added by legitimate editors? -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * A random sampling infers they are OK. MER-C 12:09, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I added an additional IP. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:04, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

spam.relianceinsider.com

 * Spammers

The IP was spamming when I blocked him for 31 hours. Then, suddenly, his previously established user account began spamming too - apparently he's been spamming this link for some time. The username is indef blocked but the IP, as I said, is not. Krakatoa Katie  20:39, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Katie.
 * Google Adsense ID: 0761072420661746


 * Related domains:
 * Google Adsense ID: 2213215412374142
 * Google Adsense ID: 0761072420661746
 * Google Adsense ID: 0761072420661746
 * Google Adsense ID: 0761072420661746


 * -- now blacklisted. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:23, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Additional account:
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 13:34, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 13:34, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Websites of Journal Communications Inc.





 * Many others
 * Many others


 * Accounts
 * - COI
 * - COI
 * - COI


 * Accounts adding similar links in addition to others that appear unrelated


 * Looks like some people are making efforts to spam websites of Journal Communications Inc. --Ronz (talk) 21:17, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I created a different accounts section for an account that's also been spamming links, but only some of the links appear to be sites of Journal Communications Inc. --Ronz (talk) 21:37, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 64.221.243.34 has added another set of links after being warned. There's no indication that the user is aware of the warning though. --Ronz (talk) 16:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 64.221.243.34 has continued. I think a block is in order at this point. --Ronz (talk) 16:55, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed & blocked. They should noticed that I hope.  Cheers -- Herby  talk thyme 16:59, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! It looks like a fixed ip address, so they should notice. --Ronz (talk) 17:08, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * More spam accounts:

-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:41, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Related domains:


 * Six requests and one e-mail to stop, followed by a block. I don't see that they've given us any choice except to blacklist their domains. Otherwise this is just going to go on and on. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Now blacklisted. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:07, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Another comment: while these links may lead to so-called "magazines", these publications are essentially POV publications written on behalf of chambers of commerce. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:23, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/May_2011
 * MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist
 * "National Spokesperson for Livability.com/PR/Web Product/SEO at Journal Communications Inc."--Hu12 (talk) 14:43, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * "National Spokesperson for Livability.com/PR/Web Product/SEO at Journal Communications Inc."--Hu12 (talk) 14:43, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * "National Spokesperson for Livability.com/PR/Web Product/SEO at Journal Communications Inc."--Hu12 (talk) 14:43, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * "National Spokesperson for Livability.com/PR/Web Product/SEO at Journal Communications Inc."--Hu12 (talk) 14:43, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

downtownbellevue.com

 * Links


 * Accounts

Repeated re-addition of commercial link that does not meet criteria of WP:ELNO and WP:NOT. It's a blog and forum site, and appears to be getting added for self-promotion of the site. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 23:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Added a new IP that began adding the link today. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 14:51, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Added additional IP. Note: site has been blacklisted, see permanent link here. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:14, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

unitursa.com spam

 * Spam domain:


 * Related domains:

Galaxtur, S.A.
 * Domain registration:
 * AV/ Juan Carlos I, 36
 * Calpe, Alicante,  -
 * ES

Esmeralda Calpe, S.A.
 * CL/Ponent,1
 * Calpe, Alicante 03710
 * ES

Unitursa Calpe S.L.
 * c/Ponent, 1
 * Calpe, 03 03710
 * ES

-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Spam account:
 * fr:Special:Contributions/80.35.179.87
 * fr:Special:Contributions/80.35.179.87


 * now blacklisted on Meta.-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:06, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Archiving
MiszaBot appears to have stopped working again - I think possibly because we had a blacklisted link (now moved and disabled) on the page so it wouldn't have been able to save. Does anyone know if we have to do anything to prod it back to work for us?

If the blacklisted link is why it stopped I think we should either be more careful about checking we disable links here once they've been blacklisted or we need to stop putting them in all together (which would be a shame because then old discussions don't show up when you search on a link). -- SiobhanHansa 20:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

firme.rs spam
Google Adsense ID: 1349757567489797
 * Spam domains:


 * Related domain:

-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 00:30, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Spam accounts:
 * sr:Посебно:Contributions/Sudarevic
 * sr:Посебно:Contributions/77.105.50.84
 * sr:Посебно:Contributions/77.105.28.238
 * sr:Посебно:Contributions/77.105.28.238
 * sr:Посебно:Contributions/77.105.28.238


 * now blacklisted on Meta.-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

onlineseo.info
Google Adsense ID: 3239128903599293
 * Domains:


 * Related domains:


 * Accounts:
 * ar:خاص:مساهمات/41.234.252.34
 * ar:خاص:مساهمات/41.234.252.34
 * ar:خاص:مساهمات/41.234.252.34
 * ar:خاص:مساهمات/41.234.252.34


 * fr:Special:Contributions/41.234.250.98
 * ar:خاص:مساهمات/41.234.250.98
 * fr:Special:Contributions/41.234.250.98
 * ar:خاص:مساهمات/41.234.250.98

-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:46, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * now blacklisted on Meta.-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.thailanddaddy.com

 * Spammers

MER-C 11:10, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The above user blanked this section. MER-C 10:45, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

This site is not spam - thailanddaddy.com - thats the reason this section was blanked out. Above needs deleting. I'll leave it for you to do it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by A2ztech (talk • contribs) 16:45, August 15, 2008


 * Related domains:
 * http://www.a2z-phuket.com
 * http://www.a2z-singapore.com
 * http://www.A2z-thailand.com
 * http://www.a2zemail.com
 * http://www.a2zpattaya.com
 * http://www.a2zpattaya.net
 * http://www.a2zwebworld.com
 * http://www.a2zworldwideweb.com
 * http://www.handii.com
 * http://www.hotels-pattaya.com
 * http://www.infinite-pc.com
 * http://www.keskinner.com
 * http://www.kevin.skinner.name
 * http://www.neupane.com
 * http://www.online-computers-games.com
 * http://www.onlinecomputersandgames.com
 * http://www.pattaya-accommodation.com
 * http://www.pattaya-businesses.com
 * http://www.pattaya-entertainment.com
 * http://www.pattaya-food-drink.com
 * http://www.tieaw.com
 * http://www.thailanddaddy.com
 * Google Adsense ID: 8413720298551548
 * http://www.kevin.skinner.name
 * http://www.neupane.com
 * http://www.online-computers-games.com
 * http://www.onlinecomputersandgames.com
 * http://www.pattaya-accommodation.com
 * http://www.pattaya-businesses.com
 * http://www.pattaya-entertainment.com
 * http://www.pattaya-food-drink.com
 * http://www.tieaw.com
 * http://www.thailanddaddy.com
 * Google Adsense ID: 8413720298551548
 * http://www.pattaya-businesses.com
 * http://www.pattaya-entertainment.com
 * http://www.pattaya-food-drink.com
 * http://www.tieaw.com
 * http://www.thailanddaddy.com
 * Google Adsense ID: 8413720298551548
 * http://www.tieaw.com
 * http://www.thailanddaddy.com
 * Google Adsense ID: 8413720298551548
 * Google Adsense ID: 8413720298551548
 * Google Adsense ID: 8413720298551548


 * Additional account:
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:09, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:09, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.mca-agency.com

 * Spammers

MER-C 11:25, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Placed some more, reverted, blocked. Maybe BL next. -- Herby  talk thyme 08:50, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

twocircles.net
has been systematically adding links to this website. see for an example of promo insertion. I have removed some of the more recent ones. ChiragPatnaik (talk) 06:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * More spam from the same IP since the entry above.


 * Domain:
 * http://www.twocircles.net
 * 22 links
 * Google Adsense ID 1546960418249054
 * Google Adsense ID 1546960418249054


 * Related domains:
 * http://www.urdustan.com
 * 15 links
 * http://www.indianmuslims.info
 * [[Special:Linksearch/*.indianmuslims.info|61 links]
 * http://www.urdustan.net
 * 8 links
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 8 links
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Collectively, these four domains have several dozen links on Wikipedia; I don't know if they were spammed or added by innocent editors. We need to think about which of these, if any, we should blacklist if the spamming continues. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I have left messages at several WikiProjects asking about the encyclopaedic value of these domains:
 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Islam
 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam
 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * In short, it doesn't look like the websites offer much in terms of encyclopedic value. They seem to be mainly a network of blog entries, directories or community websites.   ITAQALLAH   21:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It is news website for Indian Muslims news therefore it has unique information that complements wikipedia historical and biographical information and since it is updated daily therefore lot of links are generated. User:kaaashif 31 August 2008. —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:26, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

motorfamilymotorcity.blogspot.com/

 * Links
 * http://spam.motorfamilymotorcity.blogspot.com


 * Accounts

Links to site have been added to multiple articles at least as far back as May 2007. Per the self description of the blog it fails WP:ELNO: "All opinions are mine and are subject to change without noticing. I guess its a kinda photo - travel - ranty - sports blog. Enjoy!" It appears to also be a COI issue with the user adding links to the blog to any article related to their personal travels. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:44, 17 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I count four warnings -- if there's any more of this, the domain will probably have to be blacklisted. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:07, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.iskconmedia.com

 * Spammers

MER-C 11:50, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Fanclub spammer

 * Spammer

Does the spreading of his own website's link in interwiki projects as well, we are already on the verge of banning him at huwiki. --Timish ¤ Gül Bahçesi  12:10, 18 August 2008 (UTC)



MER-C 13:34, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Symposium
Spam on Symposium by  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.96.155.108 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 18 August 2008

olympic.chinaassistor.com

 * Links


 * Accounts
 * Seems to be the original account as had a deleted article about the portal site.
 * Seems to be the original account as had a deleted article about the portal site.


 * Blocked as spam-only account.
 * Blocked as spam-only account.
 * Blocked as spam-only account.
 * Blocked as spam-only account.
 * Blocked as spam-only account.

-- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I'd be inclined to list this for the next few days. It might save folk wasting their time reverting stuff?  I'll pop back later & see if anyone agrees!  Cheers -- Herby  talk thyme 08:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I suggest listing this now -- 6 warnings followed by a block. My own belief is that if spamming's bad enough to justify blocking a user, it's bad enough to blacklist his domains.


 * Related domains:


 * Spam article:
 * China Assistor


 * Domain registration:
 * A KEY TECHNOLOGY CO.LTD[1][2]
 * RM408, Flat 1st, Hi-Tech&Innovation Incubator, Economy and t
 * QuanZhou, FJ
 * CN 362000


 * SmarterEE Co.
 * DongFangMingDu 12-202
 * YiChang, HuBei 443700
 * China
 * 7176555466
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * now blacklisted. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 22:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

[1] chinaassistor.com/html/copyright/aboutus.htm [2] chinaassistor.com/html/copyright/contactus.htm

sermonaudio.com

 * Previous incidents
 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2008 Archive Jul 1


 * Sites spammed


 * Spammers

MER-C 12:13, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Earlier IPs:


 * Five warnings plus a block yet still spamming, some of it to fairly intolerant stuff.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?keyword=catholic&entiresite=true


 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Ooops, I forgot about XLinkBot. Let's see if that does the trick. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:28, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Older spam sources:
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * There are some problems here, I've taken this to the blacklist. Guy (Help!) 21:17, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * there is now a general block against using links to sermonaudio.com. this is affecting legitimate uses like in King James Only movement. i had to replace two long-standing citations with in order to save the page.   — Chris Capoccia  T&#8260;C 04:46, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

jdkatz.com

 * Spam pages


 * Sites spammed


 * Spammers

MER-C 12:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * More deleted articles:
 * Incidents of ownership
 * Jeffrey D. Katz -- deleted twice


 * An older sockpuppet:


 * This guy's been hitting Wikipedia for quite a while and clearly knows our rules. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:10, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Now blacklisted. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 22:39, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

spam.dentistattijuana.com


Alas, the warnings just aren't cutting it. I even tried in Spanish.

Spammers:

Montco (talk) 18:03, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Related domains:


 * Commons spam document upload:
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Mvasquez19


 * Eight warnings and a block: . -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:26, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Now blacklisted. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 22:37, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.nps.gov
Legit link and a reliable source, but this user is spamming it. Katr67 (talk) 19:30, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I also just reverted his/her 1st edit, which in its self-promotional nature, screwed up a category. I haven't reverted any others. Katr67 (talk) 19:32, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * In my opinion, the site being linked is appropriate for the article on the Lewis and Clark Expedition (where it already existed); but linking to the high-level entry page is not appropriate for most of those articles.
 * I'm not sure if it's true for all of the articles where this was added; but the handful I checked already had links to the appropriate subpage. My opinion is that all the articles need checked - if the subpage is not already linked, it could be added.  And this main directory link could be removed. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:53, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The user is linking to various subpages of nps.gov., and not the main directory link. (that's the U.S. National Park Service site, for those playing along at home) That means some of the articles now have more than one nps.gov subpage linked, which may or may not be appropriate. If I get time I'll do some checking and note my progress here. Katr67 (talk) 20:20, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah - I had checked several where they were all linking to http://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/lewisandclark/, which was the high-level link I was talking about. There are subpages to that one which would be more appropriate - and in some cases were already linked from the articles.  I see now that they are adding different nps links to other articles.  --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:32, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * P.S. Note that the user is continuing to add links after a uw-spam Katr67 (talk) 20:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The user has been informed of this discussion. Katr67 (talk) 20:26, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * As the user is ignoring all comments - I think escallation to WP:ANI may be appropriate. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:37, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I just blocked this editor for 24 hours for disruptive editing. I love national parks; I never thought I'd have to block someone like this, however this is a collaborative project and stubborn, relentless linking-campaigns just don't fit our model of encyclopaedia building. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I added this to XLinkBot for a short moment, until I saw that I have already 12693 additions of nps.gov in the database, and it would therefor probably give too many reverts on good additions. Still this is pushing links, and that should stop.  Don't worry about the block, A. B., this is a very good example that even good links can be pushed inappropriately, content says more than links only.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 10:42, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Our spam filter is now blocking spam in edit summaries
The spam filter now appears to block spam addresses in edit summaries even if the domain is not in the page text. I just learned this the hard way. It's probably a response to all the shock site spam recently left in edit summaries by vandals; some will crash browsers. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 22:46, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

shownearby.com

 * Domain:
 * http://sg.shownearby.com/

-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 06:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Accounts:

http://spam.guitarstatic.com

 * Spammers

MER-C 12:35, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Please can someone check these links
Please check external links being added by 64.62.108.202. Thanks. &mdash; Alan✉ 20:22, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Links


 * Accounts

Added related links for user making request. Appears to be SPAM to me. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:09, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The target is a WordPress (blog publishing) page, using adsense account #ca-pub-6831750335119417. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:14, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * added an additional IP (SPA) adding link, and in many cases replacing other existing links to add it. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 00:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Link spam
Account solely created to link spam. Michellecrisp (talk) 00:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Links


 * Accounts


 * This account has already received a level 4 warning which they asked about received, a response and deleted - straight after adding their link to yet another page. The editor clearly has no other purpose here. If there's an admin who could consider blocking that might be good (No rush Herby - it can wait 5 minutes :-).  -- SiobhanHansa 12:12, 21 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Waited 5 minute (to post this :)). Blocked & thanks.  The edit summary is always useful! -- Herby  talk thyme 12:21, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.wikiz.info
User has been on Wikipedia since 2003, editing once in a while. The home page of the external site states that "The founder of wikiz.info is Amr Aboelela", which matches the userID here. I've left him a "welcomespam" message. -- Versa geek  01:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

there is lots of spam pn google.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.38.33.125 (talk) 04:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

mpoc.org.my

 * Domain:


 * Accounts:


 * Articles:
 * Oil palm
 * Palm oil
 * No response yet to multiple warnings. --Ronz (talk) 15:48, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Ajax framework and List of Ajax frameworks
Adding external links to the above articles. Has been asked not to, I've | suggested that the editor should create an article about their framework instead of posting external links, however editor has chosen to ignore their talk page and revert instead.


 * Main article diffs:, , and
 * List diffs:, , and

Cheers, This flag once was red   19:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)


 * (Not sure what the correct way to do this is, so apologies if I'm screwing anything up)
 * This can be marked resolved; anon has been warned (thanks, User:EdJohnston!) and hasn't reverted/inserted again.
 * Thanks for your help!
 * This flag once was red  06:25, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.basketboltr.net
Adsense pub-8611235936327815


 * Spammers

It's used in a few (just under 10) articles as references. The question is, XLinkBot or blacklist? MER-C 12:07, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Opinions sought on http://sss.sramanamitra.com
In following up on the editing of IP 202.83.41.107 I came across edits by: Who's contributions are to start brief bios all using this URL as a ref. The Bios look like they could be minor but interesting additions assuming the summaries are correct. But I'm suspicious of the editing pattern and wonder about the appropriateness of the source.

There are other uses of the site that appear to have been added in good faith. -- SiobhanHansa 12:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * For this link, the links into it appear to be blog postings of a self-described "strategy consultant" who has not, as yet, been established as notable per WP:BIO. To me, these links fail WP:RS and WP:ELNO, so should be used for neither refs nor external links.
 * As to the articles involved; my opinion is that if other sources can help substantiate the subject's notability then the articles could just be cleaned up by removing links to the above site. If no other sources are available, then I would add "unreferenced" and "notability" tags, and if no improvement is seen after being allowed time to address the issues, then submit for AfD. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:38, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

"Travesti" porn site spam
Current ongoing "travesti" porn site linkspam of a number of domains from a number of IP addresses.


 * from :
 * from (user blocked for linkspam):


 * from :
 * from :
 * from (user blocked for linkspam):


 * from (user blocked for linkspam):


 * from (user blocked for linkspam):


 * from (user blocked for linkspam):


 * from (user blocked for linkspam):


 * from (user blocked for linkspam):


 * from (user blocked for linkspam):


 * from :


 * from :


 * from :


 * from :

There are probably more, but that's all I found. -kotra (talk) 01:43, 23 August 2008 (UTC)


 * 74.54.75.2 hosts about half of the sites above. Other sites on that server, which I'll class as


 * Related domains
 * Black hat SEO site.
 * Black hat SEO site.
 * This one is different - it's a scraper site.
 * Another suspected scraper site.
 * Linkfarm, but doesn't seem related to the above.
 * Same content as amasya.iyi-dershane.info
 * Another linkfarm.
 * Black hat SEO site.
 * This one is different - it's a scraper site.
 * Another suspected scraper site.
 * Linkfarm, but doesn't seem related to the above.
 * Same content as amasya.iyi-dershane.info
 * Another linkfarm.
 * Black hat SEO site.
 * This one is different - it's a scraper site.
 * Another suspected scraper site.
 * Linkfarm, but doesn't seem related to the above.
 * Same content as amasya.iyi-dershane.info
 * Another linkfarm.
 * Another suspected scraper site.
 * Linkfarm, but doesn't seem related to the above.
 * Same content as amasya.iyi-dershane.info
 * Another linkfarm.
 * Linkfarm, but doesn't seem related to the above.
 * Same content as amasya.iyi-dershane.info
 * Another linkfarm.
 * Same content as amasya.iyi-dershane.info
 * Another linkfarm.
 * Another linkfarm.
 * Another linkfarm.


 * ... because they have similar content and sometimes link to each other. No useful content for Wikimedia projects, so . MER-C 08:45, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

spam removal tools
Hi are there any spam removal tools?

I use the following regexes in AWB to get rid of it \[http\://www\.xyz\.com/(.*?)\] \*\s\[http\://www\.xyz\.com/(.*?)\] \*(.*?)\[http\://www\.xyz\.com/(.*?)\] \*(.*?) http\://www\.xyz\.com/(.*?)\s \*\[http\://www\.xyz\.com/(.*?)\] http\://www\.xyz\.com/(.*?)\s

I would appreciate it, if anyone can help me with a tool or help me rewrite the above regexes into one or reduce their number. Cheers ChiragPatnaik (talk) 08:00, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.love007.org
AdSense pub-8126938227577534
 * Spammers

MER-C 10:07, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.silyeek-tech.blogspot.com
MER-C 12:01, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Spammers
 * Looks like he created an account to continue the spamming and ignore the warnings --Ronz (talk) 14:24, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ronz,

Here to clarify I have been posting several articles in wiki before. There are 2 type of knowledge links I try to post here. Sorry for I didn't know there is administrator for Wiki as I know it work for public to update.

My intention for updating the links here is because just trying to help others as I was working as researcher before and I know researchers are hungry for good resources. My concern is to place knowledge about ADAPTIVE NEURAL NETWORK and GENETIC ALGORITHM stuff. A working SIMULATION implemented in C#. Please read and understand carefully for these 2 articles: Genetic Algorithm (GA) In Solving Vehicle Routing Problem and ADALINE TDL Neural Network Simulation In CSharp (C#). There are tremendous works has been carried out for these topics as they are research title for a master level.

Please email me at ahyeek@gmail.com for future clarification. I am please to provide you more resources and discuss with you where is the suitable place in wiki to be placed in order to benifit more people as I understand, a good resource is pretty benefit to a idea-hungry researchers.

Regards, Ahyeek —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahyeek (talk • contribs) 14:42, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * In general, Wikipedia is not a venue for promoting new research.
 * I think it would help if you could state how you'd like to contribute here in light of the the comments you've received so far on Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, especially WP:COI. --Ronz (talk) 15:15, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

estar.lk

 * Domain:

estar solutions (pvt) ltd
 * Registration:
 * 55/19, Vidharshana Mawatha,
 * Galawilawatta,Homagama,
 * Sri Lanka


 * Accounts

Subsequently deleted or blanked -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:57, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Inappropriate advertising pages
 * User:Estarsolutions
 * User talk:Estarsolutions
 * ESTAR
 * Talk:eSTAR
 * Our eSTAR article is about an astronomical project; the editor turned the talk page into a promotional page for his company

Spamming The Fiction Circus links on Wikipedia
Spammers:

User is on Wikipedia with the singular purpose to raise the profile of the said website, spamming them in the "External link" section of articles or creating a standalone "Reviews" section (WP:SPAMMER). Although WP:EL's 1st and 4th recommendation allow for professional or expert reviews, user has not been able to justify the expertise or professionalism of the authors, instead relying on sentiments (paraphrased) such as "The community (I) think they are experts, so they are." and "Instead of those money-grabbing sites, this site deserves to be promoted." (Refer to User talk:CorsairSanglot for the warning and ensuing discussion.)

In short, user is insistently adding links to a site with suspect expertise and professionalism to promote the site. Jappalang (talk) 22:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

spam.legalmenu.com

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


 * Cross-wiki spammer, see tr:Special:Contributions/85.97.76.4.
 * Cross-wiki spammer, see tr:Special:Contributions/85.97.76.4.

MER-C 12:53, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Added to global blacklist. --Erwin85 (talk) 13:36, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.asiadeathpenalty.blogspot.com

 * Spammers

Ignores XLinkBot. MER-C 12:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

http://sss.bumcheekcity.com/

 * Links


 * Ad-sense account
 * 2514500840383323


 * Accounts

User has added links to multiple articles over the past year, although most additions have been done in the last 1-2 months. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:02, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.cardiacforum.co.cc



 * Spammers

MER-C 13:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

more content-free sites
-- Versa geek  05:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.onelifeboard.com

 * Spammers

MER-C 12:48, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

IP spamming for bostonbaseball.com/baseball_movie

 * Link

Lots of recent spam. User was warned 4 times. --Damiens .rf 21:06, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Account


 * That IP kept spamming after the 4th warning. The IP is registered to the Boston Globe.


 * Related domains:
 * http://www.bostonmovietours.net
 * http://www.sanfranciscomovietours.com
 * http://www.sanfranciscomovietours.com


 * These domains were spammed previously by:


 * Possibly related domains:
 * http://hawaiimovietour.com
 * http://austinmovietours.com
 * http://vancouvermovietours.com
 * http://movie-tour.com
 * http://washdcmovietour.com
 * http://miamimovietour.com
 * http://movielocationtour.com
 * http://washdcmovietour.com
 * http://miamimovietour.com
 * http://movielocationtour.com
 * http://miamimovietour.com
 * http://movielocationtour.com
 * http://movielocationtour.com


 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Carpar201

 * Account

User:Carpar201 seems to be spamming; inserting a link to DullesMarketplace.com wherever possible. --Spud Gun (talk) 16:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * If it's bad enough to block an account, then it's bad enough to blacklist. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:42, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

tolly.com by Kevintolly

 * Link


 * Account

User has been posting links to multiple External Link sections. While the site involved appears to meet the requirements for a WP:RS, the spamming of these links appears to be getting done just to add the link - in the ones I've reviewed so far, the links are not expanding on the content of the article, nor providing insight to the subject. Some links to the site have been used as refs by other editors in the past; those links appear much more appropriate.

Also, given the username involved, this appears to also be a WP:COI issue. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:01, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Cross-wiki spam:
 * de:Spezial:Beiträge/Kevintolly
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

hiphopost.blogspot.com



 * Spammers

Spellcast (talk) 03:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Numerous warnings plus a block; time to -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:23, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

User Regional123 spamming for Conservapedia
User:Regional123 seems to be here merely to ask people to join up to Wikipedia's "rival", Conservapedia. Their contributions to date are nothing but that. Thought I'd let someone know, I hope this is the right place to do so. Alastairward (talk) 08:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I left a note for Regional123. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

www.oriflame-cosmetics.com
An independant consultant attempting to fool people by making the oriflame official website link, link to his website. His attempts are constantly reversed however IP 82.7.0.227 constantly switches the official website link to link to his website, please may an admin take immediate action. Maxwhr (talk) 16:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I see two marketing/advertising links in the recent edit history of that article - both of which should be kept out of the article per WP:ELNO and WP:NOT:
 * I've cleaned up the external links in Oriflame and some related articles. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I've cleaned up the external links in Oriflame and some related articles. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I've cleaned up the external links in Oriflame and some related articles. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Bible Black link spam
This user added a stealth link to her fan site after being warned that it is against Wikipedia policy. She admitted such on another forum, and in my personal knowledge has been known to spam other fourms with links to her site. DocWatson42 (talk) 19:50, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

MTC Media Inc http://spam.mtcmedia.co.uk

 * They sell SEO services and have been spamming Wikipedia for almost two years. What a coincidence.

http://spam.ozzys.co.uk http://spam.lindaremedical.co.uk http://spam.xileclothing.com http://spam.sensation.org.uk http://spam.shmooz.co.uk http://spam.autogasscotland.com http://spam.bloozy.co.uk
 * Sites spammed

See.
 * Related domains (other clients)


 * Spammers
 * Spammer moved links up and replaced existing links.
 * Spammer moved links up and replaced existing links.

MER-C 12:57, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

sevsen.net spam

 * Spam accounts:
 * http://www.sevsen.net


 * Spam accounts:
 * tr:Özel:Contributions/81.215.136.118
 * tr:Özel:Contributions/81.215.136.118
 * tr:Özel:Contributions/81.215.136.118



Hijacks links to legitimate sites. Bears watching; not enough warnings yet to justify blocking.-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:15, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Putnam Media spamming Wikipedia

 * Spam domain:
 * http://www.plantservices.com Presently 1 link in article space


 * Related domains:
 * http://putman.net no links in article space
 * http://www.foodprocessing.com Presently 17 links in article space
 * http://www.pharmamanufacturing.com Presently 2 links in article space
 * http://www.knowpharma.com no links in article space
 * http://www.controlglobal.net no links in article space
 * http://www.controldesign.com Presently 1 link in article space
 * http://www.controlglobal.com no links in article space
 * http://www.chemicalprocessing.com Presently 4 links in article space
 * http://www.wellnessfoodsonline.com no links in article space
 * http://www.industrialnetworking.net no links in article space
 * http://www.putmanftp.com no links in article space
 * http://www.skilltv.org no links in article space
 * http://www.putnammedia.com
 * http://www.putmanpublishing.com
 * http://www.controlmag.com
 * http://www.controldesignmag.com
 * http://www.controlmagazine.com
 * http://www.foodcreation.com
 * http://www.processingdeck.com
 * http://www.softwarestrategies.com
 * http://www.putmanftp.com no links in article space
 * http://www.skilltv.org no links in article space
 * http://www.putnammedia.com
 * http://www.putmanpublishing.com
 * http://www.controlmag.com
 * http://www.controldesignmag.com
 * http://www.controlmagazine.com
 * http://www.foodcreation.com
 * http://www.processingdeck.com
 * http://www.softwarestrategies.com
 * http://www.controldesignmag.com
 * http://www.controlmagazine.com
 * http://www.foodcreation.com
 * http://www.processingdeck.com
 * http://www.softwarestrategies.com
 * http://www.processingdeck.com
 * http://www.softwarestrategies.com
 * http://www.softwarestrategies.com
 * http://www.softwarestrategies.com

-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:48, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Spam account:

Luna Musik Management, Guzman Construction

 * Spam domains:


 * Related domains:


 * Spam account:

Not enough warnings to justify blacklisting. Bears watching.

-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 15:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Wait -- there was another IP previously blocked:


 * als:Spezial:Beiträge/75.153.46.151
 * als:Spezial:Beiträge/75.153.46.151


 * Many thanks to Delicious carbuncle for flagging this.


 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 15:24, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

ourdaily.info

 * Link


 * Account

The site itself provides summaries of news from other sites. The other sites may be appropriate, but news/search aggregators are not per WP:ELNO "Links normally to be avoided ... 9. Links to the results pages of search engines, search aggregators, or RSS feeds."

Also, in multiple cases the anon redirected a valid link in favor of his link ... keeping the original description in what appears to be an attempt to redirect page hits. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:03, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Google Adsense ID 1271060355521522


 * Ignored 4 warnings. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:32, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

User talk page spam-tracking data
I received a question about the tracking data I add to spammers' user talk pages; after answering it, I thought it might be useful to repeat it here and see what comments and suggestions others may have:


 * I add the following:
 * Always: a "live link" to the actual site: http://example.com (Contrary to some fears, this doesn't buy any search engine favor for the spam domain). Adding this link means this spam account page show up if someone uses the Special:Linksearch page to look for other instances; for example, click on this wikilink and you'll see this talk page on the list because of the live link above:
 * Special:Linksearch/*.example.com 
 * Often spammers use multiple accounts and you don't know there's a real problem until you see the cross-account pattern.
 * A list of domains adding this link. I use these special spam investigation templates but that's not critical:
 * IPSummary … example: 
 * UserSummary … example:
 * Optional: add LinkSummary for each domain … example:
 * Optional: If you poke around and find any related domains, list those, too. Don't list them though unless you're certain the same person controls them. One way you can tell: follow the money. If the spammer uses Google ads, the Google ad links will have an embedded referral code prefaced by  "ca-pub" ; that's the account Google sends the ad revenue check to. 
 * Here's the link embedded in a Google ad on one spammer's page:
 * http: //pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/iclk?sa=l&ai=Bef_BV7S-SJSyNJbazQXI8vGTDfTTtVuKk47WBMCNtwGA6jAQARgBILmehgcoBDgAUP6v0-r-_____wFgybbIh-CjtBCyARR3d3cudGhla GlwaG9wb3N0LmNvbboBCTcyOHg5MF9hc8gBAdoBTWh0dHA6Ly93d3cudGhlaGlwaG9wb3N0LmNvbS8yMDA4LzA4L2Fs YnVtLXJldmlldy1ob29kdHJlYXNvbi1ieS1ueW9pbF8xMy5odG1syAKM_LAEqAMBsAOSlaAGyAMHiAQBkAQBmAQA&num=1&adurl=http:// clickserve.dartsearch.net/link/click%3Flid%3D43000000077783491&client= ca-pub-1294607511457798 &nm=4
 * Alternately, if you can usually click on "Ads by Google" and it will take you to a page about their Adsense program. Once again there's an embedded referral code:
 * http: //services.google.com/feedback/abg?url=http: //www.relianceinsider.com/&hl=en&client= ca-pub-2213215412374142 &done=1&adU=+&adT=Reliance+Reliance&adU=++&adT=Reliance+IPO&adU=+++ &adT=Reliance+India+Mobile&adU= ++++&adT=Reliance+Infratel:
 * LinkSummary's AboutUs.org link takes you to a page that includes bot-produced guesses as to related domains but these are not definitive. That page will also have a "What links here" link in the left column that lists additional suspects.  The domaintools link gives more definitive information as to who owns the domain; on the other hand, its "Related Sites" list is usually wrong and a waste of time. Note that tracking down everything with AboutUs.org can be very time-consuming and is very optional.
 * Alternately, if you can usually click on "Ads by Google" and it will take you to a page about their Adsense program. Once again there's an embedded referral code:
 * http: //services.google.com/feedback/abg?url=http: //www.relianceinsider.com/&hl=en&client= ca-pub-2213215412374142 &done=1&adU=+&adT=Reliance+Reliance&adU=++&adT=Reliance+IPO&adU=+++ &adT=Reliance+India+Mobile&adU= ++++&adT=Reliance+Infratel:
 * LinkSummary's AboutUs.org link takes you to a page that includes bot-produced guesses as to related domains but these are not definitive. That page will also have a "What links here" link in the left column that lists additional suspects.  The domaintools link gives more definitive information as to who owns the domain; on the other hand, its "Related Sites" list is usually wrong and a waste of time. Note that tracking down everything with AboutUs.org can be very time-consuming and is very optional.


 * Here's an example of tracking data I added to a spammer page: . Do not use "subst" with any of these templates. If you don't have much time, at a minimum add a live link.


 * If the spammer is on his 3rd warning or worse, I list it at WT:WPSPAM. The WikiProject Spam team seeks to identify and stop especially problematic spammers that ignore requests to stop. Our primary tools are the spam blacklist and XLinkBot; blocking usually doesn't do much since spammers often just switch accounts or IPs. WT:WPSPAM is also helpful if you're in a rush and don't want to spend much time on the spammer.


 * If this is just a first or second warning and the spammer's used no other accounts, I may just use a live link since a full investigation is time-consuming and most spammers stop after one or two warnings. Instead, I spend most of my spam-searching time perusing blocked spam accounts to see if their domains should also be blacklisted: Special:IPBlockList


 * ''Thanks for your help. We're covered with spam, so we can use all the help we can get. All the links in those special templates lead to a variety of interesting tools for finding related domains; other spam accounts, etc. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:43, 3 September 2008

Comments? Suggestions? -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Nope, seems fine. For the record, XLinkBot tries to extract the link matching the revertlist-rule the user has added from the diff, and adds that to the warning on the talkpage (sometimes fails).  In this way these editors also show up in the linksearch.
 * If the additions are by new or ip users, then we can be quite early in adding it to XLinkBot. It does not harm established editors, and keeps a lot of work away.  If I see a link being added and where there are not many other uses yet, I first add it to XLinkBot, warn the editor (if XLinkBot does not beat me to it), and revert his earlier edits.  I know this is not always nice, but I have been running after editors too often, keeping on warning and reverting.  It is then important to react swiftly when the editor does start to discuss, either on his own talkpage, or on user talk:XLinkBot.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 12:09, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Ship related postings by User:Viliyana89
Could you take a look and tell me what you think?
 * Links



The first three links all share the same Google ad-sense account. The primary edits of this user appear to be to add the above external links - but there are some good additions mixed in as well. I'm very suspicious due to three of the sites being closely related, but the mixed-in good edits make me wonder if it could somehow be a well-intentioned user who is making questionable additions of links. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:43, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I see you've already dealt with this spammer:
 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2008 Archive May 1


 * Compare the user name to that on the domain registration for yachtcritic.info.


 * I found 3 related domains using the AboutUs.org pages:
 * If you poke around, you may find more.
 * If you poke around, you may find more.
 * If you poke around, you may find more.
 * If you poke around, you may find more.


 * bg:Специални:Приноси/Finweek
 * bg:Специални:Приноси/Finweek


 * Definitely spam in my opinion.
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:18, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I've posted to the user's talk page - and will add links to the involved user talk pages as well.  If it continues, I'll consider submitting it for blacklisting. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:03, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Err... what's this?
Is my name listed here because I linked to a no-no website, or something? I added the link because it's a news website that verified my information. Is there a problem with it? Blue Danube (talk) 02:36, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Nope, your name is in the list in the bottom. That list is just an overview of how and by who the gets used.  To me it seems that this link is widely used (by many high volume users, and by a wide range of different users), I don't see evidence of spamming, and I even think that user:Tampabay721 is not involved in the website (and I have now whitelisted that user for this link).  Nothing to worry, I would say.  That your name, and those of other high-volume users appears there is for us a reason to not blacklist the link in any way if it would be added inappropriately ('spammed') by a user, but that we then have to handle that 'problem' in a different way.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 11:57, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

percorch.com

 * Spammers

MER-C 12:50, 5 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Spammed after your last warning. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:43, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Hospital search site spammer


Hi, I warned this user about spamming and rolled back all the links without contacting y'all. Today he's reverted all my edits. (See my talk page and his/hers for more info.) I haven't had time for more than a quick reply but I think this needs a sterner warning and an admin to roll back the links again. Gotta run, thanks. Katr67 (talk) 15:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I have rollbacked the edits again, added it to XLinkBot's revertlist and given the user a final warning. Unfortunately, if the user uses undo the bot does not remove them again.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 16:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Millionstars alerted me on my talk page to some related spam/spammers:



I haven't done any cleanup, but note that link in Utah article isn't broken just misformatted. Katr67 (talk) 17:45, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Tax info
Vast majority of edits are addition of a "reference" that is really just a link-aggregator ad-farm. Primary sources should be referenced instead in all cases. 128.138.120.79 (talk) 19:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Links related to EvisionHoldings.com

 * Links


 * Accounts


 * Gumby945 could use a block, given he's ignored multiple warnings. --Ronz (talk) 00:29, 6 September 2008 (UTC)


 * My 2 cents: blocking seldom stops a spammer -- he just switches IPs or accounts and then he's harder to find. Better to just blacklist his domains


 * Related domains:
 * http://biodieselinvestors.com
 * http://bionicproducts.us
 * http://evisionholdings.com
 * http://investinginstockmarket.net
 * http://kdsmicronex.com
 * http://whyinvestinenergy.com
 * http://investinginsecurities.com
 * http://celluloseethanolplants.com
 * http://kdsmicronex.com
 * http://whyinvestinenergy.com
 * http://investinginsecurities.com
 * http://celluloseethanolplants.com
 * http://investinginsecurities.com
 * http://celluloseethanolplants.com
 * http://celluloseethanolplants.com


 * Public domain registration data:
 * Evision Holdings Inc.
 * 10437 Wyatt Earp Ct
 * Las Vegas, NV 89129
 * US
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:50, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

historyanimated.com
has added links to to more than 40 articles, with only a couple of other edits. I reverted all such links made by the IP and left this warning. Another editor has questioned here whether the links are spam. The editor at 216.228.170.126 has questioned my actions here. I welcome review and any feedback on my actions. -- Donald Albury 15:33, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

It's definitely spam, as they ignored your warning. Also:


 * Adsense pub-1107008511660248
 * Adsense pub-1107008511660248

MER-C 02:03, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I am the author of the material in question. I believe the material fits the Wiki guidelines for adding external links. It is directly relevant, free, and not meant to promote any product or website. If it were possible to add it directly to Wiki without an external website, I would gladly do so. These are complex animations of battles showing the background and movement of forces during battles - each takes about 200-250 hours to build in Flash. Take a look at Gettysburg and decide for yourself:   http://www.historyanimated.com/GettysburgAnimation.html

Donald Asbury (above) deleted some links and received this response from one of the authors "Hi, Donald. I'm not sure why you think the animated history links are spam, but I restored the one on General Forrest after checking the link. I think it's an excellent link for anyone interested in Forrest's military history. JD Lambert"

And the only time I am aware I was warned about adding links the actual author of the material repsonded to the warning person "I came here to thank Jcagney for adding the "Animated History of The Siege of Petersburg and Surrender at Appomattox" external link to the Battle of Sayler's Creek article which i was watching because i recently created the Sayler's Creek Battlefield article. I found it really interesting and played it all the way through. I could see it being questioned for its direct relevance to any one article like the Battle of Sayler's Creek article, which is covered in only one page of the animation. The animation would be most relevant for a wikipedia article about the entire siege-to-surrender period, if there is one. However, for the Sayler's Creek article, having the link there still helps to place that battle in a larger context. I think this is an unusual thing, we should try to figure out how to incorporate links to this, rather than block it off because it is different. Anyhow, thanks again because i enjoyed it! doncram (talk) 22:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)"

I asked the owner of the Gettysburg Battle page to take a look at the material on the external link and asked it would be OK to list the link on the page. He is also the author of all the maps on most of the Civil War battle pages and heavily involved in all the sites. His response: "It is not possible to give "permission" in Wikipedia because people can always edit away things others find satisfactory. I have no objection to this link (other than that I don't like the word The capitalized). There are people and robots around, however, who object to mass additions of links, so you need to be judicious. For example, adding links to all the generals' bio pages was rather over the I top. One link per battle or campaign seems fine to me. But that's just my opinion. ..... Hal Jespersen (talk) 17:01, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I stand chastised and agree to not violate what Hal Jespersen has suggested. Given that, does anyone have any objection to my restablishing the external links as suggested? One per campaign/battle? Thank you

Please advise, Thanks, James Cagney — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcagney (talk • contribs)


 * First, any time you leave a comment on a talk page, you should "sign" the comment by placing four tildes ~ at the end of the comment. Second, I will reply to you here as I have reverted your comment on my talk page because it overwrote part of my last comment there. You need to be careful to not change anything posted by another editor on a talk page. Third, no one editor (except, possibly, for Jimbo Wales) speaks for Wikipedia, but our anti-spam guidelines have the consensus of the community and cannot be unilaterally changed or suspended. This has nothing to do with the merits of the material being spammed, nor with the intentions of individual editors who add a link to a spam site. It has been determined that allowing someone to add multiple links to an external site can be detrimental to Wikipedia, and it has also been determined that is an unacceptable conflict of interest for someone to add their own work to Wikipedia, unless that work has previously been published by a reliable source. Fourth, before contacting any more uninvolved editors to seek support for your position, please read the behavioural guideline at Canvassing. -- Donald Albury 13:00, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

My apology for being a bad typist. I did not mean to overwrite - I tried to correct. I had a further clarification from Hal Jespersen - who appears to be the main force behind the Wiki Civil War project. He states "I think your animations are well done and don't object to judicious inclusion as External links. My concept of judicious would be to select only the most important or relevant places to link. For instance, Gettysburg has dozens of articles about the campaign and battle and literally hundreds of articles about men, women, and units who fought there. I'd recommend linking only from Battle of Gettysburg and Gettysburg Campaign (assuming you also animate the campaign as a whole). By the way, 'reliable sources' is a concept only relevant if someone were to put your animation into References or Notes, using them as a cited source of info for writing the article. In most of the important ACW articles that are well-cited, we tend to avoid website References unless they have very notable owners, such as government agencies, universities, historical societies, etc. Hal Jespersen (talk) 15:05, 10 September 2008 (UTC)"

As far as the Reliable Sources go, all the animations religiously follow the best historical sources and attempt to add nothing to them. When an opinion is given, it is the opinion of a noted historical writer and quoted as such. They follow the same pattern as all Wiki material that is in text or maps - they draw on the work of the best historians without attempting to add any interpretation to the material. The animations are highlighted on the websites of Dakota State University (the key site for history education links), TeacherOz (the key site for primary and secondary history teachers), University of Victoria, are on the curriculum of dozens of primary/secondary/colleges in the US and abroad. They are also used extensively within the Unites States military (army, navy, and marines) for historical training of US forces. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcagney Jcagney (talk) 20:45, 10 September 2008 (UTC))(talk • contribs) 20:41, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

enfacto.com

 * Links


 * Users

Looks like a spam-only account, but the link appears "useful". I haven't done any investigation or cleanup. Katr67 (talk) 14:42, 7 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello! I am more or less a newbie to Wikipedia, so I apologize for my transgressions thus far. I am a lawyer who seeks to help improve the quality of caselaw-related Wikipedia entries.


 * My account isn't a spam-only account. I've made a number of edits purely to improve the content of legal articles. See, for instance, my edits to the Fifth Amendment article (I would provide a link but I'm not sure how).


 * It is true, however, that most of my efforts have consisted of adding a link to Enfacto.com's full text display of Supreme Court opinions in the "External links" section of caselaw-related Wikipedia articles. Note that I have not made any changes to existing cites to Findlaw, Justia, Oyez, etc. I have only added an external link where it was absent, and that link has been to Enfacto.com.


 * Not knowing the external links policy at first (but later being told about them by Katr67), I added external links to internal portions of articles. I only did that at first not knowing about the policy, and where I'd see external links to Findlaw, Justia, etc., in other caselaw-related articles (such as in the See Also section next to where cases were listed). I stopped doing that after being linked to the policy by Katr67, as you can see from my history.


 * One purpose of my presence on Wikipedia is to improve the quality of caselaw-related Wikipedia entries by adding External links to open sources of law such as enfacto.com, precydent.com, altlaw.org, etc. Findlaw is a subsidiary of Thomson West and linking to it seems contrary to the ideals of Wikipedia. In addition, Findlaw has popups. Any of the above-mentioned sites would be a superior source of the full text of an opinion. I personally prefer enfacto.com, but I'm here to advocate the link to alternative, open, and superior sources of law.


 * The links I made were not only to a "useful" site--namely enfacto.com--but I also always linked directly to cases and not to the site generally (which I would see more as spam). My links were all equivalent to links to Findlaw--in fact, I think links to enfacto (and precydent, altlaw, etc) are superior because they lack popups and the display is easier to read (for instance, there aren't any advertisements). Note I only added External links where they didn't exist in the first instance.


 * That said, I would like to see enfacto.com taken off the spam list and I would like to start a discussion on alternatives to Findlaw as the external link to the full text of cases. Any help on this matter would be much appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by K8lj (talk • contribs) 21:49, 8 September 2008 (UTC)  K8lj (talk) 21:53, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, well I suggest you go raise these points at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law where many of our editors who work on legal topics coordinate their activities. If your link has merit, they may want to use it. They can also give you some coaching on how to navigate our rules and practices here. For starters, take a look at our simplified ruleset.


 * You aren't on any blacklist but we do have to keep this record here. Fell free to go ahead and remove our warnings from your user talk page now that you've absorbed them. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 22:01, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

relationship-buddy.com

 * Link
 * User
 * User

Reported by Kelly  hi! 03:09, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Bad backlog on MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist
Please pitch in and help whittle this down. We have editors who've been waiting several months.

Thanks, -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 15:15, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Other eyeballs required
This started as a content dispute so I would really appreciate other editors taking a look at this for me.

added references on the 529 plan article to. I removed them stating it wasn't a reliable source but the other editor reverted with reasoning on [|the talk page]. While building the case that this was not a reliable source I discovered the domain name had been registered only two days before My man manny added it to the article. I looked back through past contributions and found links added to similar sites also registered to the same user and in one case also added only shortly after the site had been registered:

This looks like an attempt to get adsense sites into Wikipedia to me, but especially since this started out as a content dispute, I would appreciate other comments.

-- SiobhanHansa 20:51, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Not knowing much about Wikipedia, doing some more reading I see that I have been editing in violation of the TOS. (Not all of my edits, mind, but some.) I will not be editing Wikipedia further. I would delete my account, but that does not seem to be possible. (Ah. I just changed my password to something I will never remember.  That will do the trick.)  --My man manny (talk) 23:09, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.f-100.org

 * Spammers

MER-C 12:24, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Dragon Ball Blogspot spam
Has repeatedly spammed Dragon Ball related articles with links to blogspot.com. Has been warned mutiple times, but contained to re-add the links without discussing their volidity. --Farix (Talk) 12:44, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

http://sss.carifree.com/

 * Link


 * Account

User spamming link to multiple oral healthcare related articles. The link is essentially a commercial website, although the specific pages linked are somewhat informative - still, better links already exist in the related articles, so these links are redundant at best. Also, note that the user name of the contributor is the same as the company mentioned on the website, so a likely COI issue here as well. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:11, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

computerathlete.net

 * Link


 * Account


 * 68.44.45.20 was blocked for spamming the link. He's returned and he's picked up right where he left off. --Ronz (talk) 01:47, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.cotabatowarez.com

 * Spammers

MER-C 12:45, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Updated. MER-C 11:43, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

http://spam.xriot.biz

 * Spammers

MER-C 11:40, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

healthaliciousness.com

 * Link


 * Account

, ,
 * Some diffs

The user Masparasol had a very sparse and otherwise unremarkable editing history until last month. Since August 15 the user has added links to healthaliciousness.com to 26 articles, but made no other edits. There are currently 39 links to healthaliciousness.com from en-WP. Ordinarily I would just revert these links, but Masparasol may be acting in good faith, and I would like some opinions on this before I start chopping. -- Donald Albury 08:13, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * After reviewing the site, it appears to be primarilly a personal blog, with recipes and nutritional info also available on some pages. Based on the information on the "about" and "Terms of use" pages, the site clearly fails as a reliable source, so where it has been inserted as a reference should be undone.  For where it gets used as an external link, those should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis; but of the ones I've looked at so far (granted, just a small sample as yet), the link should be purged per WP:ELNO and WP:NOT.
 * As to the user - there's circumstantial evidence to suggest a COI (most blog entries are from the same state the user claims to originate from, and the site was registered only about two weeks prior to the first posting of the link on WP) - but I would probably still WP:AGF at this point and just issue standard notices to their talk page. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:09, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the comments. I'm going to have to find the time to work though the list (instead of just hitting the Undo button repeatedly). -- Donald Albury 18:28, 12 September 2008 (UTC)