Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2022 Archive Feb

promotionparadise.in
Insertion here and here. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:31, 2 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Looks like the only user adding the links, on the link as a result (for now) - thanks for reporting. Pahunkat (talk) 20:40, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

bestmassagechairdesign.com
OhNo itsJamie Talk 17:27, 8 February 2022 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --OhNo itsJamie Talk 18:35, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Spam/UPE related to Connect Resources
Multiple links spammed by SPAs, aside from also appears to be a case of UPE. Links have been spammed to various articles (incl. Business license, Immigrant investor programs, Human rights in Dubai), and are related to a company for which a draft exists at Draft:Connect Resources. – NJD-DE (talk) 11:24, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

conifersgarden.com
-- Ben Ben (talk) 19:09, 13 February 2022 (UTC)


 * See also diff (admin only)., cross-wiki problem.   --Dirk Beetstra T  C 03:34, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * See also diff (admin only)., cross-wiki problem.   --Dirk Beetstra T  C 03:34, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * See also diff (admin only)., cross-wiki problem.   --Dirk Beetstra T  C 03:34, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * See also diff (admin only)., cross-wiki problem.   --Dirk Beetstra T  C 03:34, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

other conifer sites
Dear Ben Ben, Why are these websites spamming?
 * threatenedconifers.rbge.org.uk
 * conifersociety.org
 * conifersgarden.com/encyclopedia
 * conifers.org — Preceding unsigned comment added by T.KovacsT (talk • contribs) 21:35, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

In reply to your question: Let us see if they are spamming, but you can already start reading WP:COI, WP:SPAM, WP:COPYRIGHT (, I will now check your other contributions), and Terms of Use, which you are all violating. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:34, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Dear Dirk,

"External link spamming Shortcuts WP:LINKSPAM WP:SPAM#LINK WP:SPAMLINK WP:SPAMLINKS WP:EXTPROMO Main pages: Links normally to be avoided and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest Adding external links to an article or user page for the purpose of promoting a website or a product is not allowed, and is considered to be spam. Although the specific links may be allowed under some circumstances, repeatedly adding links will in most cases result in all of them being removed."

Each topic contains a different link. According to the theme. There are so few plant descriptions on the subject, these pages are outstanding. I've tried to edit text on wikipedia, but it was still called spam and deleted. That's why I thought I'd help edit the external links. If someone else edits say conifers.org, it is allowed as a link. If I do, will it be deleted as spam? — Preceding unsigned comment added by T.KovacsT (talk • contribs) 04:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

allbestdigital.com
—  Newslinger  talk   08:54, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

due.com
Stealth spamming over time, so far by a single user. OhNo itsJamie Talk 16:49, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

"Free downloads" websites


Two sites that host pdfs of books in Bengali. While both sites have disclaimers saying they will remove copyright violating files, they do host free pdfs of books that are available for sale elsewhere (I discovered them when I reviewed Draft:Himadri Kishore Dasgupta which had links to both sites as well as to websites selling the same books). I see no reason why links to either of them should be allowed – they fill no encyclopedic purpose, apart from the possible copyright violations. --bonadea contributions talk 13:04, 14 February 2022 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:15, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Bot to convert copyvio refs to CN
Is there a bot that can convert references to citation needed templates? Following the recent blacklisting of some copyvio content farms, I've been working to replace existing references to these sites. They fall into three categories:

1) contain links to where they copied their content from - I'm about 1/3 through converting these 800 refs

2) don't link back to their source, are mostly stable links

3) don't link back to their source, content farm deletes content soon after publishing

The first group clearly have value in that it is usually straightforward, sometimes in tandem with Internet Archive, to provide a proper reference. The second group may have some limited value in that translating the article to the probable language of origin can point you towards the original source material. The third group has very little value; they are rarely archived and the only info you have to go off of is the title, which is either translated or synonym-swapped. There's no reason to believe that the references provide disinformation, and the resulting misinformation is pretty minimal, such as in the unusual circumstance that they synonym-swap a quote that then made it onto WP; this makes me think a CN tag is a fairly safe step to take.

The websites in question:

Group 2:
 * eg24.news (40 links in main and draft space)
 * then24.com (41)
 * saudi24news.com (57)
 * latestnewssouthafrica.com (64)
 * archyde.com (154)
 * newstracklive.com (258)

Group 3:
 * ruetir.com (39)
 * netherlandsnewslive.com (48)
 * pledgetimes.com (69)
 * italy24news.com (101)
 * in-24.com (264)

Star Garnet (talk) 20:51, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

pradlo.pl
—  Newslinger  talk   14:33, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

delta8thc.market
Refspam at Tetrahydrocannabinol ☆ Bri (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

advgyan.in - added to multiple Indian law related websites
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Naushervan (talk • contribs) 12:57, 6 February 2022 (UTC)