MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/August 2022

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

4x4maniacal.com[edit]

Spam on various articles related to sport-utility vehicles: [1], [2], [3]. I didn't risk accessing the website itself, but in a search I found that the text has poor grammar; likely either poorly translated into English or bot-generated. --Sable232 (talk) 21:51, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

weighmag.com[edit]

Added to weighing scale by the same IPs spamming the website in the preceding section: [4], [5], [6] --Sable232 (talk) 21:51, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

bedsbath.com[edit]

Persistent refspam. General Ization Talk 14:17, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

techhelpguide.com[edit]

Persistent refspam. General Ization Talk 15:29, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

newhealthinsurance.com[edit]

Abused as replacement of WT:SWL. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:01, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Beetstra:  Defer to Global blacklist, cross-wiki problem. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:02, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

breitbart.com[edit]

The blacklist contains \bbreitbart\.com\b. This suggests that this edit, in which a blacklisted source that I removed was reinserted, shouldn't be possible. What's happening here? (I'm an admin, but have been stopped from inserting blacklisted URLs previously, so I assumed that the blacklist made it not possible.) - David Gerard (talk) 22:36, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That particular article is on the whitelist, added here. --Kinu t/c 22:46, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ah, ty (d'oh!) - David Gerard (talk) 00:15, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redtube.com and YouPorn.com[edit]

I recently noticed these two websites Redtube & YouPorn are blacklisted on wikipedia in 2008 "14 years ago" for problems involving one being that clicking on some of the links can result in the user receiving multiple unwanted pop up spam windows, Now after 14 years these problems dosen't exist on websites & these are the most popular and most viewed websites in the world, Now their is no reason to keep them in blacklist so these websites must be unlisted from blacklist. 103.141.159.228 (talk) 14:49, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No. They're commonly abused by vandals. Acroterion (talk) 15:02, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
no Declined per above. --Kinu t/c 03:06, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question on www.satoshi-island.com[edit]

Hi, let me copy here a question I asked on Wikipedia:External links/Noticeboard. I wanted so seek advice before formally requesting an addition to the blacklist. (I hope I'm in the right place to ask my question.)

Lataro, one of the islands of Vanuatu, was recently leased by some guy, who decided to rename it “Satoshi island”, and turn it into a “Bitcoin Paradise” commercial platform (whatever that means). As a result, the entry for the island not only has the usual sections on "Geography", "History" (just like other islands of Vanuatu) etc., but also a link to www.satoshi-island.com presented as the island's “official website” (sic). That link has been repeatedly added on the page; yet the problem is that it is clearly a promotion for a commercial project of cryptocurrency. Does it really have its place on Wikipedia? I deleted the link as this was my understanding of WP policy, in line with other editors; yet it keeps coming back.

I'd suggest two separate entries: one about Lataro the island itself (with its geology etc.); possibly another one about that “Satoshi island” business venture (like there are other WP links on certain companies, provided they meet the notability criteria etc). If so, that spam link might go on the second page, but would not be polluting the entry on Lataro.

What is your take on this? Should that URL be blacklisted? -- Womtelo (talk) 13:36, 5 August 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for raising this here. I'd like to understand it better too. From my perspective, I would like to know if there is a difference between www.satoshi-island.com on the Lataro page and say www.cabaretebeachdr.com on the Cabarete page. Zaurus (talk) 17:45, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oneearth.org[edit]

oneearth.org: 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 - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com oneearth.org has up-to-date profiles of the earth's 800+ terrestrial ecoregions, authored by credentialed subject-matter experts, including many of the scientists who developed WWF's ecoregion system. It's maintained by a not-for-profit. The site can provide reliable sources for articles in the ecoregions wikiproject. Tom Radulovich (talk) 05:41, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tom Radulovich: It got blacklisted due to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2021_Archive_Apr#One_Earth. Looking at that I see massive spamming by accounts with a likely COI (likely meatpuppetry). --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:30, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking into it, Dirk. I'm somewhat familiar with the circumstances. The two users who added external links to ecoregion articles were new to Wikipedia, disclosed that they worked for One Earth, and asked whether it was okay to add links. Per the conflict of interest guidelines they ought not have added the external links themselves. I don't know whether anyone clearly advised them not to. Perhaps it made sense to undo their contributions. Characterizing the articles they linked to as spam is unfair – they're objective and well-researched non-commmercial resources, and further understanding of the articles' topic. The One Earth articles on ecoregions aren't as extensive, but are more up-to-date than the other peer-reviewed ecoregion articles from WWF and Encyclopedia of Earth, and complement those resources. The remedy – blacklisting the entire One Earth site – seems disproportionately harsh. It's not beneficial to the ecoregions wikiproject, which is working to create well-written and well-sourced articles on ecoregions. Is there no appeal? Tom Radulovich (talk) 19:29, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Tom Radulovich I wanted more context. I agree, it looks like misguided COI efforts, which then did not stop when they were warned (and well, the number was way over the top, and placement as well). The issue here is not 'the material linked to is spam', the problem is here 'the material was spammed to Wikipedia', and to stop these additions the spam blacklist is a good measure (there could have been more warnings beforehand).
Obviously, there is appeal, that is what this section is for. But I generally like to see delistings properly discussed as an admin (User:Newslinger) found reason to add it, and even for 'good' sites someone originally had an incentive to spam Wikipedia with it. We don't want to open the floodgates unnecessarily. Dirk Beetstra T C 05:32, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Tom Radulovich: minus Removed from MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist, I'll follow your suggestion on the use of the site, and hope that the spamming stopped now. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:37, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I watch most of the articles and if anything looks suspicious I know where to report it. Tom Radulovich (talk) 05:54, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]


econlib.org[edit]

I cannot find this site on either the local or global blacklists and yet I am blocked from citing it in an article. Sinopecynic (talk) 20:31, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

jrank.org[edit]

Aggregator of refspam that appears to be an entirely unsourced copy of text taken from encyclopedia.com. Further discussion here - Amigao (talk) 01:07, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Domywriting[edit]

Spammers

Please blacklist.-KH-1 (talk) 12:13, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@KH-1: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --OhNoitsJamie Talk 01:33, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clinion.com[edit]

Has been spammed off and on since January. Ignores warnings, and both registered accounts are indef blocked for linkspamming, so this is likely block evasion. - MrOllie (talk) 17:07, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MrOllie: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:22, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

softswarescrack.com[edit]

Ahmad yasin 462 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)
Eronica eri 12345  (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)

Recent spambot activity - see deleted contribs from the two accounts.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:59, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ponyo: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:14, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

satoshi-island.com[edit]

Zaurus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)

Commercial link for a bitcoin enterprise based on that island of Vanuatu. That link looks spam to me. See here my request; as it never got a reply, I'm trying this other way for requesting to add it to the blacklist. (NB: The user Zaurus I'm pinging here is a goodfaith user, not a spammer; but he's been involved in the discussion about that link.) -- Womtelo (talk) 08:01, 19 August 2022 (UTC).[reply]

bimaloan.net[edit]

Ongoing spam campaign from these and other IPs. plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. OhNoitsJamie Talk 04:24, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Smoothsell.com.ng[edit]

Spamming from one user, now blocked. Website appears to be some sort of online storefront for mobile network access. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 06:52, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

prowrestlingnewshub.com/wrestler/alex-abrahantes/[edit]

Persistent socking by Jaydenstyy on Alex Abrahantes. ProClasher97 ~ Have A Question? 06:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • no Declined Blocking/page protection is more appropriate for this situation. OhNoitsJamie Talk 13:40, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Criclink, trendsinfoo, footballarroyo[edit]

I just spent a lot of time cleaning this up xwiki and here, please SBL it. It's all being added by IPs and spam only accounts. PICKLEDICAE🥒 17:15, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If there are xwiki issues, should they be globally blacklisted on meta perhaps? OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:24, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've requested both. It's a lot of crap. PICKLEDICAE🥒 17:50, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
sir please do not block it i will loss my all investments. Saleemsail (talk) 09:53, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Good. PICKLEDICAE🥒 12:18, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sir help me Saleemsail (talk) 10:09, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
sir can i explain it,
I give some one as a project for insert linking on wikipedia of related pages, i paid him good money, but i don't know whay he did that spaming, Now i am in big trouble, please un block it next time it will be not done,
Thanks. Saleemsail (talk) 09:51, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Praxidicae: Handled on meta. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:43, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/August_2022&oldid=1109134359"