Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2021 Archive May

onlinecasinogames777.com
Frequent spam link used by NTSAMR Userpage casino spambots. Needs blacklisting. Pahunkat (talk) 10:08, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ - Handled on meta, cross-wiki issue. Blacklisted as simply "onlinecasinogames", which should hopefully prevent other spam. Pahunkat (talk) 12:29, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

allprecisehvac.com


Link was on Air conditioning. Opening for COIBot, I can see a few hits on Special:log/spamblacklist for some blacklisted domains. Pahunkat (talk) 20:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

gadgetsmart.tech
Spamming their website as el and ref on various tech-related articles. – NJD-DE (talk) 12:50, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Gadgetsmarthere is blocked. No other users or IPs in COIBot report. – NJD-DE (talk) 16:52, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost/2014-06-11/Paid editing
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Escrte (talk • contribs) 05:41, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , can you please explain us how this is an issue? Dirk Beetstra T C 08:21, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The owner of the target link runs a notorious PR company focused on Wikipedia. The purpose of this link is to promote the aforesaid business and to thereby legitimise the business / extortion activities of William Beutler and his associates and to direct the victims to his corporate website. This reported page and this link were used by Beutler's associates to attempt extortion from the lady victim from India which we are discussing on your talk page. Accordingly, to protect this project, I am highlighting this page and this link so Mr. Beutler's associates cannot use it again against other victims. The alternative is that rogues are misusing Beutler's name in which case also this link should be removed. Escrte (talk) 06:04, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The following article should also be included as it has 2 instances of this promotional SPAM link Statement on Wikipedia from participating communications firms/Interview. It is one of about 30 such links we can see to beutlerink.com on EN:Wikipedia to this corporate website - all of which should be expunged and placed on the WP:WPSPAM blacklist and COIBOT linkspam pages. Escrte (talk) 09:55, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * It entry should be here. In the company Beutler Ink summit 2019 they displaying a copy of The Signpost. All links on here should be expunged. Why he was allowed to do an article is beyond a joke. And they are still offering Wikipedia engagement services. There should be no links from here to a PR/Social media agency/company.    scope_creep Talk  11:42, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm concerned that this appears to be using the spam blacklist to further some kind of off-wiki dispute. GeneralNotability (talk) 02:59, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , I think more and more that this is an on-wiki dispute which has been blown out of proportion. If there is really any truth in the case that some 'high profile' editor is really asking for money or otherwise they will expose their COI 'spam' then that evidence should be brought to WMF legal (which apparently was done), but that story sounds highly unlikely to me (it makes a weak case, if any other 'blacklist regular' would just encounter the link and blacklist it, then there is not much to extort anymore).  I somewhat expect that the editor's comment that they have been extorted is more of 'we will blacklist your domain if you don't stop', and that they are trying to play other victim cards to avoid that. Dirk Beetstra T  C 08:04, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

There is nothing to do here. The link has not been added to articles, and the linked to page is a purposeful usage by the community. This approach taken is not the right approach. There is a lot of documentation around about practices, and where they should be followed-up. Yes, it has complexity, and that is because it is complex and people try to abuse the process. — billinghurst  sDrewth  03:00, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * If you believe that the page is out of scope, then nominate it for deletion, though I don't fancy your chances.
 * If your complaint is about paid editing, then please see WP:Paid editing and utilise the talk page; you will have both supporters and detractors. There will also be other links there to progress such discussions about compliance and practices.
 * You have already complained to WMF about Beuterink, and their alleged practices, and I would advise you to be wary with open accusations of behaviour as you're approaching the libel boundary—there is nothing that we can do to speedy WMF's legal processes.
 * If you have concerns about any external links on a page and their use/abuse/misuse, then the place to have that discussion is the pertinent talk page.
 * It is incorrect to say that I have complained to WMF about Beuterlink. I am primariy concerned about the discriminatory treatment whereby if some anonymous person completely unknown to an Indian lady victim uses her corporate website URL as a Wikipedia citation, apparently in good faith, the victim from India is immediately tarnished by multiple newly created Wikipedia pages that her very respectable website is a spammer. OTH if a white American who hobnobs with WMF and prominent "Wikipedians" (after all he is TheWikipedian(.net) gets multiple promotional links to his corporate Wikipedia PR website the "community" and "admins" do not take the same approach and describe it as "purposeful usage by the community". There is a word for this, (and to put it delicately) it begins with the letter "r" and ends with the letter "m". Escrte (talk) 16:38, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree, I don't expect that you complained about anyone else's work, you seem to have complained about one or two editors (admins?) who acted upon their observation, if I understand you correctly, that the 'Indian lady victim' added her own corporate website URL as a Wikipedia citation. I will also believe that that lady acted in good faith, but also a good faith bad edit is a bad edit.  Apparently, a COIBot report was created.  First question is: did COIBot pick this up 'automatically', or has the report been requested by an editor who saw this?  And what type of follow up has there been?  Have the edits been removed?  Has the link been blacklisted?  Have Wikipedians commented on the talkpage of the Indian lady victim?  Did the Indian lady victim respond to any concerns?  Did the Indian lady victim stop or continue.  Did the Indian lady victim respond, or even, stop until any discussion came to a proper conclusion?  Has the Indian lady victim clearly disclosed her edits as required?  Has the Indian lady victim been contacted off-wiki regarding the domain (for this question a simple yes or no is enough, and do not elaborate further if the answer is yes)?  I would suggest that you describe those neutrally, you are losing credibility to first throw around terms like 'extortion', 'gangs', 'racism' and similar terms.  If you wish you can leave out the actual reports (avoiding any Streisand effect or other backlash), but that will make discussing this much more difficult.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 07:58, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * . No, that is grossly incorrect. The Indian lady did not add her corporate URL as a citation. Somebody quite unknown to her did so. For 1 year she did not come to know about it until she found that the number 1 link for her company name in Google search was the Wikispam pages created by COIBOT. The Indian lady has never edited Wikipedia, directly or indirectly. Escrte (talk) 12:22, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , so your remarks regarding extortion, gangs, racism are also all grossly incorrect? The Indian lady is not a victim, she just found the report on Google, no-one took action on it, no-one contacted the Indian lady regarding it, it is not blacklisted, it is just a report that just appears on Google (which can be resolved, it must be a really old no-indexed report)?  A calm request without all this language would have gone a long way here, Escrte.
 * I can work on Wikipedia side of this, but if you do not want us to know which report it is, you will have to ask Google yourself to remove that result from the Google database. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 13:41, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Completely untrue. Very soon after the Indian lady victim came to know of the pages generated by your COIBOT her representative approached the EN:Wikipedia community very calmly and politely, but some admin blocked that person (who did not know EN:wikipedia's curious policies) for being "Not here" (ie. apparently the person is not a contributor to the encyclopedia). Thereafter WMF legal was approached (auto acknowledgement ticket number received) with 2 reminders - with no reply. The Domain registrar Mark Monitor has also forwarded the lady's domain abuse complaints to WMF - once again no reply. However, very strangely "Wikipedians" are approaching the lady's representative on behalf of Beutler Ink and demanding a kings ransom to get the articles generated by your COIBOT removed by "The" Wikipedian. Seeing your response to this discussion, do you condone this kind of harassment and blackmail of a person who has absolutely no connection to Wikipedia and has never edited Wikipedia ? What kind of safeties are there in COIBOT so that it is not systematically abused for exactly this kind of extortion during the global COVID-19 pandemic. What kind of safeties does your COIBOT have to get the Indian lady victim's offending WIKISPAM pages completely deleted from Wikipedia ? If you are running such a bot with inadequate safeties then you should, in GOOD FAITH, shut it down immediately and undo the damage done. Any other course would leave your own actions open to question. You also know very well that Google's stock reply for Googlesearch complaints is that if Wikipedia removes the pages they will be automatically de-indexed by Google search and disappear. NB: I am fully prepared to disclose the offending pages to be removed, but not publicly "on wiki" for reasons we have previously discussed. Escrte (talk) 14:45, 2 May 2021 (UTC)


 * . states: "Paid editors must also provide links on their Wikipedia user page to all active accounts at websites where they advertise, solicit or obtain paid Wikipedia-editing services." This domain is not being spammed in article space. Blacklisting this domain would only make it more difficult for paid editors to disclose their affiliation with Beutler Ink. —  Newslinger   talk   09:30, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment for SEO purposes it is immaterial if the linkspam is in article space or not, so long as it is indexed by Google and the other search engines. Why are there over 30 backlinks to Beutler's website from Wikipedia (leaving aside the 3 which his employees correctly disclosed per )?Escrte (talk) 16:43, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , links are simply not indexed by Google or any other search engine that is following the settings of the website that they index (and many namespaces are not indexed by google either). The editor properly disclosed their conflict(s) of interest and has discussed the additions of their links.  And as you describe, most of the links were not added by the employees.  Here there is no action needed, it is not being spammed.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 07:58, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * IMHO, You have misinterpreted WP:PAID. It requires that disclosed paid editors must directly link to all their active 'accounts at websites where they solicit etc. their business. This means all their accounts on fiverr, upwork, craigslist ... The present links to beutlerink.com are not being used for that purpose.Escrte (talk) 11:40, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Jobs at Indian hospitals
Links primarily spammed as Job offers on medical related articles by these two users (one blocked already). – NJD-DE (talk) 09:33, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * + 1 user who spammed doctifyindia. – NJD-DE (talk) 19:18, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

jharding.co.uk


User already blocked (after repeated warnings and warning deletions), logging here for tracking. OhNo itsJamie Talk 17:34, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

esigarasiparis.net
On Heated tobacco product, checking COIBot. Pahunkat (talk) 18:51, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

spshutters.com.au
Several users are pushing this domain. Waiting for the COIBot report to see if there are anymore. —Bruce1eetalk 06:30, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

deloreanrental.com

 * -- spammed DeLoreanRental.com links until admins placed 3 month autoconfirmed edit lock
 * -- same as above
 * -- same as above
 * -- same as above
 * -- same as above
 * -- same as above
 * -- blocked for spamming via sockpuppetry -- see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&oldid=1020585528#User:MikeJones19888_User:GullWing88_reported_by_User:Retrotechexpert_(Result:_Socks_blocked)
 * -- same as above
 * -- new account created to work around edit lock of DeLorean Time Machine article.
 * -- new account created to work around edit lock of DeLorean Time Machine article.

Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DeLorean_time_machine&type=revision&diff=1020672972&oldid=1020373539
 * 2) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DeLorean_time_machine&type=revision&diff=1021103320&oldid=1021043841
 * 3) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DeLorean_time_machine&type=revision&diff=1020688784&oldid=1020685619
 * 4) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DeLorean_time_machine&type=revision&diff=1021380257&oldid=1021318332
 * 5) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DeLorean_time_machine&type=revision&diff=1019529062&oldid=1019232940
 * 6) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DeLorean_time_machine&type=revision&diff=1019851800&oldid=1019813145
 * 7) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DeLorean_time_machine&type=revision&diff=1020149886&oldid=1020077206
 * 8) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DeLorean_time_machine&type=revision&diff=1020167607&oldid=1020161883

Multiple sockpuppet accounts have been involved in a WP:REFSPAM edit war on the DeLorean Time Machine article attempting to remove valid citations and replace them with links to web addresses soliciting DeLorean Time Machine rental services. Users have been banned for this sockpuppetry but there have been continued disruptive editing resulting in admin decision to require autoconfirmed or confirmed access. Admins recommended we submit this domain for spam here per Admin Noticeboard Decision Retrotechexpert (talk) 19:00, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

This user has created yet another account Bigboyslim25 in order to get around the edit lock placed on the DeLorean Time Machine article. User has created a draft page hoping to directly advertise their services at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Delorean_Time_Machine_Replicas -- this page is redundant and already covered in detail on the aforementioned existing article page. Retrotechexpert (talk) 15:40, 6 May 2021 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist, draft in question G12'd. --GeneralNotability (talk) 20:04, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

TimberBuildingSpecialists
Spammed on Log cabin by mentioned user, checking COIBot to see if there are others Pahunkat (talk) 10:33, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * - only that user. Pahunkat (talk) 13:25, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

suhnisindh786.com
Reviewed ten of their edits and it appears they source it always with their website suhnisindh786.com. Clear case of WP:REFSPAM. In case of doubts, note the linked social media accounts on that website. – NJD-DE (talk) 21:05, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * User blocked now. Also, for an even clear sign of COI, note the email address at . — kashmīrī  TALK  15:40, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Spam filter
I've just created this as a redirect to Spam blacklist. "Spam filter" is the phrase seen by editors whose edits are blocked by a spam link, so it should lead somewhere but I'm not sure whether that's the best target or not. If you know of anywhere better, please feel free to retarget it. Thryduulf (talk) 17:17, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigations/Alinss4

 * Spam pages


 * Sites spammed
 * Already blacklisted
 * Already blacklisted
 * Already blacklisted
 * Already blacklisted
 * Already blacklisted
 * Already blacklisted
 * Already blacklisted
 * Already blacklisted
 * Already blacklisted
 * Already blacklisted
 * Already blacklisted
 * Already blacklisted


 * Spammers

MER-C 18:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Blacklisted. MER-C 16:43, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

csidesigns.com


--MarioGom (talk) 07:32, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Suspected blog spam


Possible suspicious link found on its userpage DFW FAA Brianvators (talk) 18:07, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Website .blogspot.com issue


Spamuser added their possible spam sites. That website marks it suspicious because what I saw is that it may possibly steal its info from users. DFW FAA Brianvators (talk) 20:55, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

quadrishattari
Seen them spamming these links on Shattari and other Islam related articles back in December. It appears they are back at providing us with their blog/chat link as external link and reference on different articles. Let's see what our friend COIBot has to tell us. – NJD-DE (talk) 00:36, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 01:43, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Filmymovies is a possible of spam


Please see the diffs of what the spambot just edited DFW FAA Brianvators (talk) 18:35, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

allbankifsccode.in


User added a possible spam on articles, please see here DFW FAA Brianvators (talk) 18:53, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

User:Aronboss1
Every single edit is a link/plug for his/her website. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 18:30, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

facefigurati.com
—Bruce1eetalk 07:35, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

tronikshop.com
See Sockpuppet investigations/Ratan Biswas1, accounts are spamming the same link. Pahunkat (talk) 20:45, 20 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Is that a user whose recreated a spam link that i speedily delete his userpage earlier? You might have seen it on their talkpage DFW FAA Brianvators (talk) 02:49, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , I think it's the same user that's spamming the link. Pahunkat (talk) 07:59, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

bagguides.com
Adding their spam link to bag-unrelated and related articles. Let's check COIBot if there is more. – NJD-DE (talk) 14:14, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

User:Johnnyseh
This user spammed eight articles with these seven money lending domains. Are they all linked? —Bruce1eetalk 09:32, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , several reside on server 45.120.149.211: traditioncredit.com.sg (3), onlinecredit.com.sg (3), sgpcredit.com.sg (3), avismoneylender.com.sg (2), sucredit.com.sg (1). The other two are a distinctly different server, but then have similar names.  Does not really seem like a necessary site, just blacklist them and call it a day? Dirk Beetstra T  C 10:19, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't understand the first part of your question ("Does not really need necessary"), but if you're suggesting that those domains be blacklisted, I'm ok with that. —Bruce1eetalk 12:49, 25 May 2021 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist (rephrased ..). --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:31, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. —Bruce1eetalk 13:33, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

visatitans.com
Kleinpecan (talk) 01:24, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Paid Editor: Braindot4
Another Paid editor advertising his services: https://www.upwork.com/freelancers/~017f37ce3f82dc74c4

Examples shared on his profile: Sahiyo, Riddhi Sen. Last page created is ClearTax, another paid page that has been rejected multiple times. Ping: MER-C. 213.230.100.199 (talk) 07:00, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Spam: Paid Articles
I have received an email from a Wikipedia editor to create page on Wikipedia for $300. When I asked from him, do Wikipedia charge for fee, he said yes. Following articles and accounts he has shared, I am not sure what is happening.

Don't Fall For Scammers! Make sure they submit your page through AFC and also ask them if the page will be permanent or not. #1 - Through AFC, which requires an admin's approval. This guarantees the page to be permanent. Archana Garodia Gupta Howard X Susan Morey Vionic

When asked about different accounts for Wiki submission, his partner shared another account User:Mydreamsparrow.

Another list of sample: Marc-David Munk DMart Dilsher Shanky

I am there is big syndicate running to spam Wikipedia. I was not sure where to report, so I am sharing info here with you. 71.17.122.34 (talk) 10:34, 31 May 2021 (UTC)