Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2014 Archive Feb 1

Robots or Users are adding spam links to Wikipedia content.

 * - One of its users who changes the links.
 * - One of its users who changes the links.
 * - The website who does the spam.

Hello, in this page el:BDSM on the External Links section every 1-2 days the links are changing, someone changes the * Γλωσσάρι BDSM - Σχετικό γλωσσάρι στο Greek BDSM Community Forum to * BDSM - Greek BDSM Community. The first link offers a glossary which has been there for many years with Greek translations that we have been working the last 7 years and the second link is a dating website without related information. What we can do about that? We have been trying to remove the links everytime to non encynclopedic content but its probably a bot who does that automatically.

Differences:

https://el.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BDSM&oldid=4494012 https://el.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BDSM&oldid=4494007 https://el.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BDSM&oldid=4462142

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dolph65 (talk • contribs) 06:34, 1 February 2014
 * We can't do anything -- this being the English Wikipedia -- but I suggest you warn the users using some variant of Template:Uw-spam2/Template:Uw-spam3/Template:Uw-spam4 (you may have to create the equivalents on the Greek Wikipedia), and if the problem persists then ask a local admin to protect the page and/or block the users. MER-C 13:17, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

sms4smile.in
Added by IPS to "External links" in several articles. Enric Naval (talk) 12:59, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

-SFK2 (talk) 06:04, 2 February 2014 (UTC)



MER-C 06:28, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Entertainment Sandhira
 Soham  16:15, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * This site was spammed on Wikipedia for many months now, I have been reverting them. But till then I knew no way to remove them or blacklist.  Soham  16:28, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Tried to spam with the same link here.  Soham  12:36, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Same article. Here.  Soham  16:30, 31 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Blacklisted. MER-C 06:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Blacklisted. MER-C 06:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Blacklisted. MER-C 06:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Blacklisted. MER-C 06:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Blacklisted. MER-C 06:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Blacklisted. MER-C 06:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Blacklisted. MER-C 06:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Blacklisted. MER-C 06:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Blacklisted. MER-C 06:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Blacklisted. MER-C 06:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Blacklisted. MER-C 06:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Blacklisted. MER-C 06:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Blacklisted. MER-C 06:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Vcrave
His contribution reveals his only purpose.  Soham  05:04, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

7obkk.com

 * link


 * accounts

Dynamic IPs whose sole purpose on Wikipedia has been to spam external links to this site onto multiple articles. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:10, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

resimsec.net
here 98.169.51.37 (talk) 03:13, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Removed. MER-C 06:37, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

lawcrossing.com / .org spammers
These editors continue the earlier spam link efforts of blocked editors RobertDCarrose, Ntwereet and - never blocked - Ntmuppets88. These SPAs insert, as ELs, links to lawcrossing.com and .org, with which they are presumably affiliated. Several articles have been visited more than once, for instance, Adam Leitman Bailey, Jeff Cohen (actor), Leigh Steinberg, Ritch Winter. JohnInDC (talk) 20:24, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Spam links to magazine from John Birch Society
Continual spamming of American political officeholder articles to show links to thenewamerican.com, a magazine put out by the John Birch Society. Of no value to the articles themselves. Wasted Time R (talk) 23:53, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Ongoing spamming of Getinfo.co.in

 * (related - Blacklisted in September 2013)
 * (related - Blacklisted in September 2013)
 * (related - Blacklisted in September 2013)

Continual spamming of Getinfo.co.in (see previous report) via URL shortener vt802.com. Vt802 was also previously used to spam timesofbook pages

There is further evidence to suggest that the two links (getinfo & timesofbook) are operated by the same group of people as one SPA - User:John.bosco.henry inserted links to both sites.

Would recommend: -SFK2 (talk) 11:02, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Blacklisting of getinfo.co.in (can someone verify current status) and vt802.com
 * Yep, confirmed they are related. Blacklisted. The URL shortener belongs on the global blacklist, I've made a request there. MER-C 03:19, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I suspect they'll probably use other sites. Best we can do is track their posts and try and figure out which articles they are likely to target. -SFK2 (talk) 13:06, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I suspect they'll probably use other sites. Best we can do is track their posts and try and figure out which articles they are likely to target. -SFK2 (talk) 13:06, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

It seems that they've moved onto another URL shorterner to spam both Timesofbook and Getinfo.
 * Update

Users: Recommend block and blacklist. -SFK2 (talk) 00:34, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Done. MER-C 13:11, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Ronz member of the Spam Project
Dear Sir or Madam,

I would be thrilled to have you peeping in the discussion I have as a user regarding the MOOCs page amendments I have made. The aforementioned "admin" Ronz, constantly and unwaveringly suppresses the content I post on the page to better it. Indeed, I strove to broaden the basis of MOOCs-providers by adding the France Université Numérique as one of these courses-maker, underpinning my stance by the addition of sources and some sort of bibliography.

However, the stubborn and stern Ronz has made the choice to ignore it, for an (so far) unexplained reason: is it treachery, wroth or just French-bashing, this is absolutely unbearable! Granting himself almighty powers over the content-improvers like me should not be tolerated: we are no pets wagging their tails in front of commercial-making companies. Am I posting some spam? No. Am I uploading some false content? Utterly not. Am I outraged by the behaviour of this individual? Absolutely.

I am no wistful admirer of Wikipedia as a source of knowledge for there are other ways to come up with more reliable basis of information, learning and culture. However, as a very mainstream and recognised source of primary content, one can attempt to improve that primary source; amending it to the best I hope.

When it comes to the sources (Ronz either did not pay attention to it and deleted them) there I grant you some: -https://www.france-universite-numerique-mooc.fr/about (The main page to instruct you about the platform: warning, it is in French) -https://www.france-universite-numerique-mooc.fr/courses (The courses, lectured and hosted in three languages: French mostly, English and German) -https://www.france-universite-numerique-mooc.fr/courses/SciencesPo/05004/Trimestre_1_2014/about (A lecture given by the winner of the "Human Sciences Nobel Prize" or Holberg Prize, Bruno LATOUR) -https://www.france-universite-numerique-mooc.fr/university/ (The Universities and Grandes Ecoles involved in the initiative: Sciences Po, Polytechnique or Panthéon-Assas are widely acknowledged as the very best units of French elite-promoters in their field of study).

There are currently no article in English treating the topic and I will not make it for I am no member of Wikipedia and I don't want to whatsoever. Yet, I look forward to you mending this unfortunate situation.

Regards,

A reader — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.241.9.242 (talk) 17:44, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Apparent advertising link spam of www.rapidagiledevelopment.com from Glynn69


This user’s edits all appear to me to be for the purpose of spammily adding external links pointing to the products of “Cove Bay Software” ().

— 8573dde5 (talk) 01:23, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Bankcreditnews refspam
Widespread refspam from Bankcreditnews - typical behavior involves inserting a small paragraph of loosely related information that links to Bankcreditnews. The linked articles are often written by a single author named "Alexandra Villarreal"


 * Link


 * Users:
 * SPA
 * SPA
 * SPA
 * Diffs among others.
 * Diffs among others.

There may be additional users - I have yet to finish identifying the specific edits. -SFK2 (talk) 02:00, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Those edits are almost a year old and that was the period I was not aware of the rules regarding referencing and citation. When I was notified by an admin, I stopped doing such edits instantly. Now I see I was wrong, but I was only trying to contribute. --BiH (talk) 09:28, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Indeed it was almost a year ago. If it was a one off case then I would've given you the benefit of the doubt - but you inserted the links multiple times. Also the fact that your edits mirror that of other SPA users does raise a few questions. -SFK2 (talk) 10:50, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * You can tripple check my account for socksuppet or SPA, if that is what you mean. I just thought that website is resourceful, I did not to do any harm. I will have my edits removed asap - as it was a few months ago, I totally forgot that I evan made it. I am really sorry for any inconvenience I might have caused --BiH (talk) 11:36, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Response to the premise of the allegations
To whomever is behind the "bankcreditnews" anti-spamming project:

I think your allegations that there is a spamming effort to Bank Credit News is unfounded and false.

Here are my augments in three sections.

Section 1: The behavior you allege would be pointless if indeed it were occuring

Here is why.

From Wikipedia: "So in February 2007, the English Wikipedia instituted a policy that tags external links "NOFOLLOW."[1] This means that major search engines like Google no longer index these links. Many web site operators still seek to use Wikipedia to increase the number of inbound links to their sites, some either out of ignorance of SEO functionality or of this policy change, others because they simply hope to draw individual readers to their site through direct Wikipedia traffic.”

Yep. I’ve known this since it was instituted. Therefore, why would I be engaged in “spamming” if I know that it won’t “drive traffic.” Obviously, if I just tell you that I’m not spamming, I doubt you believe me. (Even though it is true). So I have to offer these explanations and defenses.

Section 2: Why do other news sources cited in thousands of articles get a “pass” on your anti-spamming effort?

If you are truly being fair and consistent in your efforts to root out spamming, I would suggest you start an anti-spam effort for the New York Times (mentioned in 242,791 articles); Washington Post (mentioned in 85,965 articles); Huffington Post (a gossip news aggregator that is mentioned in 13,923 articles!); Auburn Journal (I grew up in Auburn, California, a pretty small town — and the hometown newspaper is cited in 2,254 articles - that MUST be spamming, right?; and so forth.

Section 3: All my edits comply with the “10 simple rules of Wikipedia” and the Wikipedia pillars.

Let’s review the 10 simple rules for wikipedia:

''Rule 1. Register an account.'' Done.

''Rule 2. Learn the five pillars.'' Yep. Let’s look at each:

- Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. My edits are congruent with this pillar. My edits update subjects with current, reputable information.

- Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view. I take care to write from a neutral point of view. I simply state the facts and cite them with reputable sources.

- Wikipedia is free content that anyone can edit, use, modify, and distribute. This pillar means that *I* can edit it, and *you* have that equal right. You do not have more rights than me to edit, and I do not have more rights than you to edit.

- Editors should treat each other with respect and civility. I enjoy a good debate. Please do not be offended or defensive that my argument is that you are wrong here. Although I am upset by your campaign against alleged spamming from Bank Credit News, and I disagree completely with your premise. But I respect that we are having this dialogue.

- Wikipedia does not have firm rules. Understand, which is why I am taking time to describe what I have done here.

''Rule 3. Be bold, but not reckless''. My edits aren’t usually bold, but perhaps being proactive in taking relatively obscure information from reputable sources and putting it into an encyclopedia (which I do) is bold. It certainly is not reckless.

''Rule 4. Know your audience: "the level of technical detail in its articles must be balanced against the ability of non-experts to understand those details.”'' You can view my edits to see that they are written in a very plainspoken, simple manner.

''Rule 5. Do not infringe copyright''. I have not done this and will not do it.

''Rule 6. Cite, cite, cite.'' I have provided properly formatted citations for all my edits. All citations lead to reputable news sources.

''Rule 7. Avoid shameless self-promotion.'' Done. I have not made any substantial amount of edits about a particular company or product. I do, however, focus on the banking industry because I think it is important to document what is happening in this encyclopedia, and it is a personal and professional interest of mine.

''Rule 8. Share your expertise, but don't argue from authority.'' Done.

''Rule 9. Write neutrally and with due weight.'' I think I do this but am open to help and suggestions.

''Rule 10. Ask for help.'' See what I wrote in previous line. Carpalclip3 (talk) 23:20, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
 * NOFOLLOW is a deterrent, not a cure. Spamming is still an ongoing problem on Wikipedia even if it is 'pointless' from a SEO perspective. In any case, stating that such measures exist is not really a defense against allegations of spamming. Your questions in 'section 2' are addressed in WP:OTHERLINKS (see second and third example). Your review of the 10 simple rules for Wikipedia is rather redundant as it fails to address my primary concern about WP:REFSPAM: "Citation spamming is a form of search engine optimization or promotion that typically involves the repeated insertion of a particular citation or reference in multiple articles by a single contributor" - which is exactly what you and the aforementioned users were doing. Your assertion "Why do I cite Bank Credit News? Because I am interested in the financial industry, and I enjoy editing Wikipedia. On many other edits I've made, I've cited other sources." is not convincing. Being interested in the financial industry does not necessitate the repeated addition of a single (arguably lesser known) reference. Also, as far I can tell you did not actually cite any sources other than bankcreditnews in your entire edit history. The fact that your additions match the pattern of edits added by several SPA (Single purpose accounts) suggests that there is a concerted effort to include bankcreditnews links in a promotional manner. -SFK2 (talk) 01:07, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Persistent referral link spam at Karmaloop
This is the first time filing one of these, so my apologies if something is amiss.

Earlier I noticed post a referral type spam link to the Karmaloop article. Upon investigating the article's history, I noticed this has been a frequent problem. For a complete list of usernames, IPs, and diffs involved see Talk:Karmaloop.



The spam was first added by : (diff, and later diff1 and diff2). Two IPs added the same link with the same referral id: (diff) and  (diff).



The most egregious case is, whose most recent edit came after a final warning was left on his/her talk page. Using the referral id to tie logged in edits to IP edits, it seems SwaggieBreh is responsible for the following spam added to the article: (diff1, diff2);  (diff);  (diff);  (diff1, diff2);  (diff1, diff2 with a sneaky shortened url);  (diff); and finally as  (diff1, diff2, diff3, diff4 with edit summary 'grammatical error', diff5, diff6, diff7, diff8, diff9, diff10, diff11, diff12).



Thanks. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  |  06:32, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Removed ChatON boilerplate to almost every Samsung device article
I removed this text from a LOT of Samsung device pages:


 * ChatON has basic features which are auto friends registration, text chat, & multimedia deliver, and put new features which are My Page, voice/video chat, & translate.


 * The main function of ChatON is divided into Multimedia, Group Chat, Trunk, and Animation Message. ChatON can send text, picture, video, & audio as multimedia.
 * Users use the personal profile into My Page. They can create group chat rooms just by selecting more than 2 buddies. All the contents that have been shared in each chat is saved into each trunk. Animation Message turns some simple drawing and stamping into short moving videos.

A link to the ChatON article page should be enough. The offending user is, and I think I got rid of all his edits. 213.144.131.99 (talk) 17:04, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Spam on "Free-Market Roads" - Talk Page.
The IP Address comes back from Turkey and a Google translate of the text seems to indicate it's spam. It occurs once a day over the past two weeks from the following two IP addresses.

K88Special (talk) 18:21, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I've semi-protected the talk page for six months. MER-C 10:42, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

gossiphitzlanka.com



 * Spammers

MER-C 11:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

livehdtv.us



 * Spammers

MER-C 09:43, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Blacklisted. MER-C 02:30, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Blacklisted. MER-C 02:30, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Vidcat.org link spam
On the R-tree article, a spammy link was inserted, to a "slideshare" type of site. Probably not even to original content, but pdf slides collected on the internet reformatted on that site.

I've noticed this wasn't the first time, and a number of these links still exist:

This looks like systematic link dropping, at a low frequency to not trigger suspicion:



Apparently this user switched to using IPs instead of an account, after being notified on his talk page:



--Chire (talk) 23:16, 22 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Ongoing spam series: one link every day.
 * 23. February
 * 24. February --Chire (talk) 15:36, 24 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Cleaned. MER-C 13:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Cleaned. MER-C 13:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Cleaned. MER-C 13:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Cleaned. MER-C 13:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

crackedhistory.com




Note that the IP is likely being used by a banned editor known for editing through different IP addresses. Perhaps this should be revert listed?  Them From  Space  17:44, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to Participate in a User Study - Final Reminder
Would you be interested in participating in a user study of a new tool to support editor involvement in WikiProjects? We are a team at the University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within WikiProjects, and we are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visual exploration tool for Wikipedia. Given your interest in this Wikiproject, we would welcome your participation in our study. To participate, you will be given access to our new visualization tool and will interact with us via Google Hangout so that we can solicit your thoughts about the tool. To use Google Hangout, you will need a laptop/desktop, a web camera, and a speaker for video communication during the study. We will provide you with an Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster (talk) 18:25, 28 February 2014 (UTC).