Revision as of 09:37, 1 December 2007 editHerbythyme (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,473 editsm →mesothelioma.pl: stopped?← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:05, 1 December 2007 edit undoMER-C (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Administrators250,754 edits →megadry.com, excessivesweating-treatment.com: +1Next edit → | ||
Line 81: | Line 81: | ||
<small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 16:30, 30 Nov 2007</small><!-- Template:Unsigned2 --> | <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 16:30, 30 Nov 2007</small><!-- Template:Unsigned2 --> | ||
:I think we should watch this one. The anons and the user have had final spam warnings and seemed to have stopped. I'd probably try a block next - thanks --] <b><sup><small><span style="color:#90F">]</span></small></sup></b> 09:35, 1 December 2007 (UTC) | :I think we should watch this one. The anons and the user have had final spam warnings and seemed to have stopped. I'd probably try a block next - thanks --] <b><sup><small><span style="color:#90F">]</span></small></sup></b> 09:35, 1 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
===sikhzone.net dhangurunanak.com cyarena.com=== | |||
*{{spamlink|sikhzone.net}} | |||
*{{spamlink|dhangurunanak.com}} | |||
*{{spamlink|cyarena.com}} | |||
Persistent dynamic IP spam (latest two incidents: ). Continuing to spam despite warnings. See also ]. ] 12:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
=Proposed removals= | =Proposed removals= |
Revision as of 12:05, 1 December 2007
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Spam-blacklist page. |
|
MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist is a page in the MediaWiki namespace, which only administrators may edit. To request a change to it, please follow the directions at Misplaced Pages:Spam blacklist. |
Mediawiki:Spam-blacklist is meant to be used by the spam blacklist extension. Unlike the meta spam blacklist, this blacklist only affects pages on the English Misplaced Pages. Any administrator may edit the spam blacklist. Any developer may use $wgSpamRegex, another method to prevent the addition of spam links. However $wgSpamRegex should rarely be used.
See Misplaced Pages:Spam blacklist for more information about the spam blacklist.
Dealing with requests here
- Does the site have any validity to the project?
- Have links been placed after warnings/blocks? Have other methods of control been exhausted? Is there a Spam project report, if so a permanent links would be helpful
- Make the entry at the bottom of the list (before the last line). Please do not do this unless you are familiar with regex - the disruption that can be caused is substantial.
- Close the request entry on here using either {{done}} or {{not done}} as appropriate. Request should be left for a week maybe as there will often be further relatede sites or an appeal in that time.
- Log the entry. Warning if you do not log any entry you make on the blacklist it may well be removed if someone appeals and no valid reasons can be found. To log the entry you will need this number - 175038760 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.
Those interested in contributing to this page may find it helpful to watchlist this page or create their own if they want to watch other pages as well. It effectively watches threads rather than pages.
There are 4 sections for posting comments below. Please make comments in the appropriate section. they are Proposed additions, Proposed removals, Troubleshooting and problems, and Discussion. Each section will have a message box explaining them. In addition, please sign your posts with ~~~~ after your comment.
Requests which have been completed are archived. All additions and removals will be logged.
snippet for logging: {{/request|175038760#section_name}}
Proposed additions
Please add new entries to the bottom of this section. Please only use the basic URL (google.com not http://www.google.com). Please provide diffs to prove that there has been spamming! Completed requests should be marked with {{Done}} or {{Notdone}} then archived. |
mesothelioma.pl
Multiple anon IP linkspamming of common mesothelioma targets. --Mdwyer 15:25, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Mesothelioma&diff=prev&oldid=174838764
- http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Mesothelioma&diff=prev&oldid=174586271
- http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Mesothelioma&diff=prev&oldid=174495933
- Thanks, warnings have been issued and it appears to have stopped. I'd block next, cheers --Herby 09:37, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thenettimes.com
Links added from multiple IPs and single- or low-edit accounts.
- 172.132.212.55 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) at Eva Mendes
- 172.162.160.152 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) at Halle Berry
- 172.130.5.206 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) at Lightspeed Media corporation
- Booya2324 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) at Joss Stone
- Baylorbearcolbert2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) at Jessica Biel
- Dragonforce322 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) at Giada De Laurentiis
and many more. Gimmetrow 21:05, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed that this one is an issue. Was it all on the 21st? I'm inclined to see if they try again, in which case I'd list it straight away I think but it is possible that they have got the message? Cheers --Herby 12:22, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
silanis.com
Please see Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Silanis to see why I propose the blacklisting of silanis.com. --Gerry Ashton (talk) 18:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- See also - Conflict of interest/Noticeboard case
- See also - WikiProject Spam case
- See also - Conflict of interest/Noticeboard case
Agreed & Done. Make sure to remove the http:// portion on talk pages where the urls are located, do this for both www.esignrecords.org and www.silanis.com. Archiving bots won't be able to properly archive if it remains hyperlinked. Thanks--Hu12 (talk) 18:47, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
megadry.com, excessivesweating-treatment.com
Added to many articles by User:Whynotthestars, and continued to this day by various anons.
Diffs (most recent edits, in most cases):
- Whynotthestars
- http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Diaphoresis&diff=prev&oldid=174569099
- http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ionotophoresis&diff=prev&oldid=174569353
- http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Perspiration&diff=prev&oldid=174569236
- http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Endoscopic_thoracic_sympathectomy&diff=prev&oldid=174569530
- http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Sleep_hyperhidrosis&diff=prev&oldid=174569608
- http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Deodorant&diff=prev&oldid=174569830
- http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Compensatory_hyperhidrosis&diff=next&oldid=174407499
- Anons
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Voyagerfan5761 (talk • contribs) 16:30, 30 Nov 2007
- I think we should watch this one. The anons and the user have had final spam warnings and seemed to have stopped. I'd probably try a block next - thanks --Herby 09:35, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
sikhzone.net dhangurunanak.com cyarena.com
- sikhzone.net: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
- dhangurunanak.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
- cyarena.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
Persistent dynamic IP spam (latest two incidents: ). Continuing to spam despite warnings. See also WT:WPSPAM#spam.sikhzone.net spam.dhangurunanak.com spam.cyarena.com. MER-C 12:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Proposed removals
Use this section to request that a URL be unlisted. Please add new entries to the bottom of this section. You should show where the link can be useful and give arguments as to why it should be unlisted. Completed requests should be marked with {{Done}} or {{Notdone}} then archived. |
Troubleshooting and problems
This section is to report problems with the blacklist. Old entries are archived |
Blacklisting email addresses
Does anyone know why this addition didn't work? E-mail address don't work? I added to the wrong place? I flubbed the regex somehow? None of the above? —Wknight94 (talk) 15:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- mw:Extension:SpamBlacklist#Performance states it'll only work with links starting with
http:
. —Cryptic 17:12, 20 November 2007 (UTC)- So it does. Unfortunate. Do you know if the meta blacklist has the same restriction? There are e-mail addresses in the list there so maybe they're using a different mechanism? —Wknight94 (talk) 18:22, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- There are only two listed and I don't think that would work either way (unless possibly it was a "Clickable" mailto: type link --Herby 18:30, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Oh so you don't think those are working anyway. Oh well, I guess we'll just have to keep reverting (or try out one of the anti-spam bots - although I haven't great luck with those in the past). Thanks. —Wknight94 (talk) 18:39, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- There are only two listed and I don't think that would work either way (unless possibly it was a "Clickable" mailto: type link --Herby 18:30, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- So it does. Unfortunate. Do you know if the meta blacklist has the same restriction? There are e-mail addresses in the list there so maybe they're using a different mechanism? —Wknight94 (talk) 18:22, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Discussion
This section is for other discussions involving the blacklist. Old entries are archived |
archive script
Eagle 101 said he had one running on meta, is it possible to get it up and going here?--Hu12 10:27, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Would be good - Eagle hasn't been working on Meta for a while though & I've not seen anything (there was supposed to be a logging script too!) --Herby 12:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
mapsofworld dot com
Why is this blacklisted? It stops me from editing User:Lupin/alltalk, which is irritating. It appears to be a reasonably harmless reference website. Lupin|talk|popups 08:07, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- Previous discussion was here thanks --Herby 08:10, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
www.michaelmanalolazo.go.cc
I got a "spam warning" on this. I have no idea where it came from. How do I get rid of the warning? Or the alleged spyware? Trekphiler (talk) 14:15, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
- go.cc has been blacklisted on meta. Apparently for being a redirect site (see request), which are normally blocked on sight. Though the URL you supply does not appear to redirect. If you need a particular link whitelisting for an article you can make a request to have it white listed. If you determine the whole domain needs removing from the blacklist you should make that request on meta.
- I'm not sure where your question about spyware comes from. I didn't see any reference to spyware when looking at this.
- To help others looking at this:
- michaelmanalolazo.go.cc: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
- go.cc: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
-- SiobhanHansa 20:00, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
blogspot.com
See also: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam § Time_for_blacklisting_blogspot.com.2C_with_whitelisting_of_specific_domains.3FI added countingcrowsnew.blogspot.com, freemodlife.blogspot.com, and googlepackdownload.blogspot.com to the blacklist. I made a previous report about the blogspot sites and they're being spammed by the same blocked sockpuppet who I filed a report about here. Spellcast (talk) 22:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Update: I've also added b5050-raffle.blogspot.com, gpd2008.blogspot.com, and itsleaked.blogspot.com. They were being spammed by the same blocked sock in that report. Spellcast (talk) 05:18, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'm inclined to blacklist the domain then whitelist where needed but some heavy flak is likely to arrive? --Herby 08:06, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- From an en:Misplaced Pages mission perspective (though possibly not your personal perspective:) a bigger issue than the flak that will be generated is the disruption to editing. I believe a lot of pages, particularly biographies of living people, contain legitimate links to the subject's blog - many of which are hosted on blogspot. Simply blacklisting and then waiting for whitelisting requests will likely
- overwhelm the whitelist page here and on meta (which given you are one of the most active admins on both, may not be ideal for you!)
- be confusing and frustrating to a lot of editors especially newbies, but also any who are not familiar with the blacklist/whitelist set up
- lead to a loss of legitimate links and legitimate edits as people struggle to work out whether to keep their edit and lose the link or the other way round while any whitelist request is ongoing.
- I think a move like that will take some careful planning and preparation to avoid these issues (might also help cut down some of the heat). One way or another, I think we need human editors to assess the current blogspot links on article pages and enter appropriate ones on the whitelist before the blacklisting goes into effect. I don't think such a move will cut out most of the flak though, so we might want to ensure there are other admins involved to help spread the weight, and a nicely presented page of evidence of the issues the domain causes to point people to.
- Blogspot certainly gets spammed a lot more than most domains, and I support blacklisting. But It's still a domain that has a lot of good links and I think it's important to think through how a move like that will impact people, and to adjust to the situation. -- SiobhanHansa 13:54, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- From an en:Misplaced Pages mission perspective (though possibly not your personal perspective:) a bigger issue than the flak that will be generated is the disruption to editing. I believe a lot of pages, particularly biographies of living people, contain legitimate links to the subject's blog - many of which are hosted on blogspot. Simply blacklisting and then waiting for whitelisting requests will likely
- Briefly - needs quite a bit of thought but equally is worth that amount of thought --Herby 13:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- There are many, many legitimate links to the domain, not only to blogs belonging to article subjects but to blogs belonging to Misplaced Pages contributors. Better to blacklist individual blogs as needed. --bainer (talk) 16:23, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Not sure why Misplaced Pages contributors would be adding their own blogs? A very limited number of blogs actualy meet WP:RS and even fewer still meet the requirements of WP:EL or are a blog that is the subject of the article or an official page of the articles subject. There are currently 32,916 blogspot.com Blog links on Misplaced Pages, if whitelisting even a thousand "legitimate links", its worth it.--Hu12 (talk) 17:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- You've presented some convincing reasons to leave certain blog links out of Misplaced Pages, but not a reason to leave all blog links out. Misplaced Pages contributors might want to link to their blogs because, you know, it is possible for said contributors to frequent websites on the internet other than Misplaced Pages :P See WP:COMMUNITY. There is also a performance cost to whitelisting and blacklisting; as far as I can tell, 1000 whitelisted entries costs more computationally than 1000 blacklisted entries (instead of using one large regex, which is how the blacklist works, you're doing 1000 individual regex replacements). Gracenotes § 18:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- I was under the impression server load was something we were supposed to leave up to the developers to worry about. If they see an issue and ask for a reassessment that would be one thing, but its not a good argument against a tactic without their weight behind it.
- The suggestion isn't that all blogs should be banned. the suggestion is that this particular domain gets spammed so much it would be beneficial to the project to blacklist it and only white list the ones that are appropriate. -- SiobhanHansa 18:13, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hu12 I think it's important not to overstate the case here. Not all of the ~32,000 links (assukming the 1K of good links estimate) that are not legitimate external links or citations will actually be harmful to Misplaced Pages. While editors' own blogs on their user pages aren't necessary to the project, in the vast majority of cases they do no harm and may help editors fell a bond that connects them to the project. Many more will be links from discussions and projects. While I don't think that's a reason for keeping a domain that is also being spammed so much - it's not the case that we do 32,000 links worth of "good" by removing them. For the most part we only really benefit from the spam and poorly placed article links that go. -- SiobhanHansa 18:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- You've presented some convincing reasons to leave certain blog links out of Misplaced Pages, but not a reason to leave all blog links out. Misplaced Pages contributors might want to link to their blogs because, you know, it is possible for said contributors to frequent websites on the internet other than Misplaced Pages :P See WP:COMMUNITY. There is also a performance cost to whitelisting and blacklisting; as far as I can tell, 1000 whitelisted entries costs more computationally than 1000 blacklisted entries (instead of using one large regex, which is how the blacklist works, you're doing 1000 individual regex replacements). Gracenotes § 18:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Not sure why Misplaced Pages contributors would be adding their own blogs? A very limited number of blogs actualy meet WP:RS and even fewer still meet the requirements of WP:EL or are a blog that is the subject of the article or an official page of the articles subject. There are currently 32,916 blogspot.com Blog links on Misplaced Pages, if whitelisting even a thousand "legitimate links", its worth it.--Hu12 (talk) 17:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- There are many, many legitimate links to the domain, not only to blogs belonging to article subjects but to blogs belonging to Misplaced Pages contributors. Better to blacklist individual blogs as needed. --bainer (talk) 16:23, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
(unindent, crosspost my post from WT:WPSPAM)
The rule \bblogspot\.com is (currently) not on COIBot's monitorlist. Some of the sub-domains have been added via WT:WPSPAM, or have been caught by the automonitoring of COIBot (mainly because the name of the editor is the same as the name of the subdomain on blogspot.com).
Still, a linksearch on the resolved IP of blogspot.com (72.14.207.191) results in a mere 118 results (all COIBot linkreports)! Often the multiple use of the single subdomains is not a cause for blacklisting, as they may only have been used once or twice. Also, I suspect there are tens of thousands of blogspot sub-domains out there, but these are only the links that are caught because the wiki username overlaps with the domainname of the subdomain (or have been reported here). Would this cumulative behaviour warrant blacklisting of \bblogspot\.com .. here, or even on meta? --Dirk Beetstra 12:37, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- Appropriate links may indeed be a problem, though the majority will fail some or many of the policies and guidelines here (or don't even have to be a notable fact, or do not need to be a working link while being mentioned; "Mr. X has a a blog on Blogspot.<ref>primary reliable source stating that the blog is the official blog</ref>"; we are not a linkfarm), and I would argue that the spam/coi part of the problem becomes a bit difficult to control... --Dirk Beetstra 14:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC)