Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Talk:Spam blacklist

This is an archived version of this page, as edited by Nixeagle (talk | contribs) at 21:53, 28 March 2008 (→www.worldmapfinder.com.: note on the size of it). It may differ significantly from the current version.

Latest comment: 17 years ago by Eagle 101 in topic Proposed additions
Learn more about this page
Shortcut:
WM:SPAM
The associated page is used by the Mediawiki Spam Blacklist extension, and lists strings of text that may not be used in URLs in any page in Wikimedia Foundation projects (as well as many external wikis). Any meta administrator can edit the spam blacklist. There is also a more aggressive way to block spamming through direct use of $wgSpamRegex. Only developers can make changes to $wgSpamRegex, and its use is to be avoided whenever possible.

For more information on what the spam blacklist is for, and the processes used here, please see Spam blacklist/About.

Please post comments to the appropriate section below: Proposed additions, Proposed removals, or Troubleshooting and problems, read the messageboxes at the top of each section for an explanation. Also, please check back some time after submitting, there could be questions regarding your request. Per-project whitelists are discussed at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist. In addition to that, please sign your posts with ~~~~ after your comment. Other discussions related to this last, but that are not a problem with a particular link please see, Spam blacklist policy discussion.

Completed requests are archived, additions and removal are logged.

Projects

snippet for logging: {{/request|934876#section_name}}

If you cannot find your remark below, please do a search for the url (link) in question with this Archive Search tool.

Spam that is only affecting a single project should go to that project's local blacklist, if available: ENWP

Proposed additions

Latest comment: 17 years ago80 comments12 people in discussion

beyond-the-pale.co.uk

  1. (it_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 03:20:15 -- http://www.beyond-the-pale.co.uk/albanian7.htm -- 217.24.248.34 -- diff
  2. (fr_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 04:03:12 -- http://www.beyond-the-pale.co.uk/albanian7.htm -- 217.24.248.34 -- diff
  3. (en_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 05:55:46 -- http://www.beyond-the-pale.co.uk/albanian7.htm -- 217.24.248.34 -- diff

Another case, not so bad, but the IP is only adding links. —— Eagle101 Need help? 11:23, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Its on a few wikis in small numbers. I'll get lwcoibot to generate a report :) —— Eagle101 Need help? 11:28, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

beyond-the-pale.co.uk

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)beyond-the-pale.co.uk
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry | blacklist hits)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)
Full report at User:COIBot/LinkReports/beyond-the-pale.co.uk —— Eagle101 Need help? 14:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Unsure - the IP contributes constructively (contribs) (well at least some stuff that is not spam!) and it hardly seems a real source of disruption at present. The pages spammed are very specific so it is as much POV as anything else? --Herby talk thyme 14:41, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sure, however please do realize that as of 6 months ago it was starting to be a common tactic, especially the die hard ones, for spammers to do some minor edits that don't add links. I've seen this tactic used several times on the English wikipedia especially. We can delay blacklisting if you wish. —— Eagle101 Need help? 16:38, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

margencero.com

  1. (es_wikipedia) 2008-03-20 23:01:46 -- http://www.margencero.com/articulos/new/modernidad_liquida.html -- 190.164.252.211 -- diff
  2. (en_wikipedia) 2008-03-20 23:05:51 -- http://www.margencero.com/articulos/new/modernidad_liquida.html -- 190.164.252.211 -- diff
  3. (pt_wikipedia) 2008-03-20 23:11:11 -- http://www.margencero.com/articulos/new/modernidad_liquida.html -- 190.164.252.211 -- diff

Another case. Your thoughts? —— Eagle101 Need help? 11:24, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Generating an lwciobot report. —— Eagle101 Need help? 11:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

margencero.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)margencero.com
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry | blacklist hits)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)
Not disputing this but the en wp link placement is still actually there & does not appear to be "unwanted"? --Herby talk thyme 15:15, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Interesting, those were added a long time ago (older then 6 months) as they are not in the reports. The cases I've looked at, using the search tool indicates that on wikis with the same article, the links were added by IPs or new users at the same time. That indicates to me that it is potentially being spammed, however I do see a few legit uses. As such I'll hold off this request for a bit and see if the problems continue or not. However if it continues to be a problem, we can always blacklist, then whitelist in locations where they want the links, but as I said, lets wait :) —— Eagle101 Need help? 16:22, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

crusades1444.hit.bg

  1. (bg_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 06:21:08 -- http://crusades1444.hit.bg -- 79.100.51.232 -- diff
  2. (pl_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 06:27:02 -- http://crusades1444.hit.bg -- 79.100.51.232 -- diff
  3. (en_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 06:28:27 -- http://crusades1444.hit.bg -- 79.100.51.232 -- diff
  4. (en_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 06:30:46 -- http://crusades1444.hit.bg -- 79.100.51.232 -- diff

Some more. I'd do this one myself but I would like some extra review. This is not on any major wikipedias. —— Eagle101 Need help? 11:32, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

crusades1444.hit.bg

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)crusades1444.hit.bg
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry | blacklist hits)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)
Unless luxo is well borked the above appear to be the sole contributions of the IP ([1])? --Herby talk thyme 14:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Correct, and as we can't block foundation wide, I used to blacklist if spammers are persistant, and its not a joe job in any form that I can detect. —— Eagle101 Need help? 16:25, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
I have a problem here - four edits are adequate "disruption" for you to even consider this? Google ing it gets a mere 21 hits. Where is the evidence that this would even be of interest to a local blacklist never mind one affecting as many wikis as a listing here would - I would certainly reject listing out of hand on en wp list. I have warned the IP on en wp with an "im" warning for what it is worth. There are still no further edits showing up on luxo for the ip. --Herby talk thyme 16:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Generally if it continues after we place it here I would blacklist it. If there are no further edits it is pointless to blacklist, however we don't have anywhere other then here to track crosswiki spam. But if this would say continue spamming over the next week we may wish to do something. The problem is if it continues it is very man intensive to stop, there is no global way to block an IP, if there were I'd recommend doing that should it continue. I will say that for what it has done blacklisting off hand is a bit heavy. —— Eagle101 Need help? 17:13, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
I should also point out, that googling it won't help much, spammers usually do this to get more hits on search engines. —— Eagle101 Need help? 17:16, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

krahufrengjisht.blogspot.com

  1. (it_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 06:13:49 -- http://krahufrengjisht.blogspot.com -- 217.24.248.34 -- diff
  2. (fr_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 07:15:48 -- http://krahufrengjisht.blogspot.com/2008/03/par-ismail-kadar-un-livre-de-messages.html -- 217.24.248.34 -- diff
  3. (de_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 08:18:46 -- http://krahufrengjisht.blogspot.com -- 217.24.248.34 -- diff

Blogspot spam, I don't know what we do with this, but its on a bunch of wikis atm, full report will show up at User:COIBot/LinkReports/krahufrengjisht.blogspot.com. —— Eagle101 Need help? 13:03, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

krahufrengjisht.blogspot.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)krahufrengjisht.blogspot.com
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry | blacklist hits)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

fracassi.net

  1. (en_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 08:34:48 -- http://www.fracassi.net/iw2evk/ -- 212.177.63.147 -- diff
  2. (it_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 08:36:31 -- http://www.fracassi.net/iw2evk/ -- 212.177.63.147 -- diff
  3. (en_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 08:37:25 -- http://www.fracassi.net/iw2evk/ -- 212.177.63.147 -- diff
  4. (en_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 08:39:32 -- http://www.fracassi.net/iw2evk/ -- 212.177.63.147 -- diff
  5. (sv_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 08:41:18 -- http://www.fracassi.net/iw2evk/ -- 212.177.63.147 -- diff

More crosswiki spam. Full report at User:COIBot/LinkReports/www.fracassi.net —— Eagle101 Need help? 13:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

fracassi.net

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)fracassi.net
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry | blacklist hits)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)
Checking the links here I would not call it significant - 19 links over 7 of the 20 wiki. Not inclined to list. --Herby talk thyme 14:00, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Alright, I'm waiting on the report by COIBot, to see if there is any more. The tools I'm using only go back about 12 hours in history. (It just started that far back). Depending on if I continue getting spam from the /iw2evk/ portion of the site, I'll blacklist that. —— Eagle101 Need help? 14:05, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Herby, I also wish to make a point, if someone reverts all the links, doing a linksearch as you are doing won't turn up much. The tool only finds links that are actually on the current version of the pages. (I was one of the authors of that tool :P) Just so ya know. :) —— Eagle101 Need help? 14:13, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
I am well aware who you are! The problem is that without say a luxo link for IP or user contribs (one of the most valuable approaches for me) the information to make a sensible decision is a bit limited --Herby talk thyme 14:35, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Thats why I'm waiting on the COIbot report. Beetstra is awesome for writing that bit of genius. By the way to clarify what I"m saying Special:linksearch is a really bad way for detecting past spam. It is good to see how much a link is used though. If a link is being used 800 times, its a bad idea to blacklist unless we remove those links. I usually check the tool to make sure the usage of the link is low, if its not I try to undo as many of them as I have time to do, or take the high usage of the link as an indication that blacklisting the link is a bad idea. An example of this is bbc, or nytimes.com, etc :). Those links are used crosswiki, and are showing up a lot in my experiments at automating the detection of crosswiki spam, but those are not spam. (Most of the time commonly used sites are not that obvious, so hopefully you get my gist...) Also the reason I'm putting a lot of these up is that I've been out of the action for a long time... and I'd like to see what the current thoughts are in various cases. —— Eagle101 Need help? 14:38, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Waiting on User:COIBot/LinkReports/fracassi.net to go blue. (the bot needs to generate the report... which takes time and database queries... —— Eagle101 Need help? 14:47, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Ok, looking at that report, I personally would suggest blacklisting. I'll leave it up to you, but my rational is that the spam has been going on for a long period of time. I doubt just reverting it is going to make it stop. We have stuff from back in 2007. I'll leave the choice up to you however ;) —— Eagle101 Need help? 14:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I was coming here to say this URL should be blacklisted, but saw Eagle has beaten me to it. Mønobi 21:49, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

xtremebubbles.com biographi.ca keithmichaeljohnson.com tangenttoy.com worldslargestbubble.com rinaldo.de

  1. (de_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:35:46 -- http://www.xtremebubbles.com/media_press.html -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  2. (en_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:40:47 -- http://www.xtremebubbles.com/media_press.html -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  3. (es_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:50:00 -- http://www.xtremebubbles.com/media_press.html -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  4. (fr_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:52:25 -- http://www.xtremebubbles.com/media_press.html -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  1. (en_wikipedia) 2008-03-20 19:47:23 -- http://www.biographi.ca/EN/ShowBio.asp?BioId=34223 -- Corvus cornix -- diff
  2. (pl_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 04:59:48 -- http://www.biographi.ca/EN/ShowBio.asp?BioId=34229 -- Mmt -- diff
  3. (pl_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 04:59:48 -- http://www.biographi.ca/EN/ShowBio.asp?BioId=34229 -- Mmt -- diff
  4. (tr_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 07:24:18 -- http://www.biographi.ca/EN/ShowBio.asp?BioId=42027 -- Dsmurat -- diff
  5. (nl_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 07:50:57 -- http://www.biographi.ca/EN/ShowBio.asp?BioId=34124 -- Agora -- diff
  6. (nl_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 07:50:57 -- http://www.biographi.ca/EN/ShowBio.asp?BioId=34621&query=John%20AND%20Rhoades -- Agora -- diff
  7. (nl_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 08:11:46 -- http://www.biographi.ca/EN/ShowBio.asp?BioId=34124 -- Agora -- diff
  1. (de_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 12:49:23 -- http://www.keithmichaeljohnson.com/ -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  2. (en_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:09:55 -- http://www.keithmichaeljohnson.com/ -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  3. (es_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:49:59 -- http://www.keithmichaeljohnson.com/ -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  4. (fr_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:52:25 -- http://www.keithmichaeljohnson.com/ -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  1. (de_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 12:54:59 -- http://www.tangenttoy.com/bubbleman/ -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  2. (en_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:09:55 -- http://www.tangenttoy.com/bubbleman/ -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  3. (es_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:50:00 -- http://www.tangenttoy.com/bubbleman/ -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  4. (fr_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:52:25 -- http://www.tangenttoy.com/bubbleman/ -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  1. (de_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 12:41:29 -- http://www.tomnoddy.com/ -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  2. (en_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:09:55 -- http://www.tomnoddy.com/ -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  3. (es_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:49:59 -- http://www.tomnoddy.com/ -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  4. (fr_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:52:25 -- http://www.tomnoddy.com/ -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  1. (de_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:30:55 -- http://worldslargestbubble.com/gwr.html -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  2. (en_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:40:47 -- http://worldslargestbubble.com/gwr.html -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  3. (es_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:50:00 -- http://worldslargestbubble.com/gwr.html -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  4. (fr_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:52:25 -- http://worldslargestbubble.com/gwr.html -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  1. (de_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 12:58:17 -- http://www.rinaldo.de/seifenblasen-show.php -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  2. (en_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:09:55 -- http://www.rinaldo.de/seifenblasen-show.php -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  3. (es_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:50:00 -- http://www.rinaldo.de/seifenblasen-show.php -- Claus Ableiter -- diff
  4. (fr_wikipedia) 2008-03-21 13:52:25 -- http://www.rinaldo.de/seifenblasen-show.php -- Claus Ableiter -- diff

Listing all these, I'm reverting them now, but we need to keep an eye on this one. All these links were added in one edit, so there are only 4 reverts to be made here. —— Eagle101 Need help? 19:15, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

This may be legit, I'm going to ask the guy. —— Eagle101 Need help? 19:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
I was also wrong with the one edit thing, they have been added in piecemeal. :S —— Eagle101 Need help? 19:24, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Ok, confirmed link additions to 9 other wikis... User:COIBot/LinkReports/rinaldo.de, User:COIBot/LinkReports/xtremebubbles.com, User:COIBot/LinkReports/worldslargestbubble.com, User:COIBot/LinkReports/tomnoddy.com, User:COIBot/LinkReports/tangenttoy.com, User:COIBot/LinkReports/keithmichaeljohnson.com, User:COIBot/LinkReports/bubbleart.com. Please opinions on this. Is this legit? —— Eagle101 Need help? 22:40, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Iffy definitely. If it is the one user only then the first thing to do I would think is to have a word with them. Taking a look on de they seem legit? If that does not work or it starts turning up from IPs then it definitely should be looked at again. --Herby talk thyme 08:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
I've already asked the user, if there is no response shortly, (he has edited enwiki again already, so he saw the new messages banner). I'm going to revert the links, and otherwise attempt to clean them up. The sites are english only, so why they are being added to other locations is beyond me. They seem *somewhat* legit, otherwise I would have removed them. —— Eagle101 Need help? 10:07, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Definitely worth watching. I see a link added to fr wp (tourisme.alsace-bossue.net & just the one). However seems a legit Commons user with a fair few contributions as far as I can see --Herby talk thyme 10:28, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

azqq.com

An other tiny-url clone: .azqq.com used to avoid the blacklist. Can you please add it to the extensive list? It has apparently be used to insert malicious links on en:wp. Thanks :) -- lucasbfr talk 12:38, 25 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Many thanks   Added --Herby talk thyme 12:43, 25 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

www.shtepiaelibrit.com

On sq.wiki, see [2], [3], [4]. Thanks, Dori | Talk 15:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

If it is just an sq wiki issue (& I haven't enough time to check then) it should be on the sq:wp:MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist probably by asking sq:wp:MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist though you are a sysop? If so just add \bshtepiaelibrit\.com\b to the sq:wp:MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist? Thanks --Herby talk thyme 15:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Ah, I didn't know that there was a local place to put them. Thanks. Dori | Talk 18:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Smart Traffic Ltd. (Cornwall) spam on Wikipedia, Wiktionary

Spammed domains
  • bags-4u.co.uk
  • cheap-tv-uk.co.uk
  • computerforstudentuk.co.uk
  • computerpartuk.co.uk
  • credit-card4u.com
  • entrepreneurs4u.com
  • gifts-occasions-4u.co.uk
  • property-and-real-estate-4u3.co.uk
  • smart-traffic.co.uk
  • studentcomputers.co.uk
  • studentfind.co.uk


Accounts


Related domains[5]
  • accommodation-4u.co.uk
  • arts-crafts-4u.co.uk
  • autocar4u.com
  • babies-children-resource.co.uk
  • beanbagfactory.co.uk
  • broadband-4u.com
  • business-services-4u.co.uk
  • cebu-food.com
  • cheap-flights4u.com
  • cheap-sat-nav.com
  • cheap-travel-4u.co.uk
  • cheapcomputeruk.co.uk
  • cheaplaptopuk.co.uk
  • cheapnotebookuk.co.uk
  • clothing-4u.co.uk
  • communication4.co.uk
  • computercaseuk.co.uk
  • computercomputeruk.co.uk
  • computermonitoruk.co.uk
  • consumer-electronics-4u.co.uk
  • consumer-goods-4u.co.uk
  • consumer-services-4u.co.uk
  • dating-service-4u.com
  • discountcomputeruk.co.uk
  • ecommerce-asia.co.uk
  • ecommerce-asia.com
  • ecommercebuddy.co.uk
  • exhibitions-promotions-4u.co.uk
  • financialservice4u.com
  • find-homes-4u.com
  • gaming-activities-4u.co.uk
  • garmin4u.com
  • giantcod.com
  • healthonline4u.com
  • holiday-4u.com
  • home-improvements-4u.co.uk
  • internet-services-4u.co.uk
  • internetbuyerdirect.co.uk
  • internetcomputersdirect.co.uk
  • internetcomputersdirect.com
  • just-diamond-jewellery.co.uk
  • kitesurfing4u.com
  • laptopbatteryuk.co.uk
  • laptopcomputeruk.co.uk
  • laptoplaptopuk.co.uk
  • loans-online4u.com
  • moalboal-travel-guide.com
  • news-4u3.co.uk
  • notebookcomputeruk.co.uk
  • online-insurance4u.com
  • onlinegambling-4u.com
  • pocket-bikes.co.uk
  • professional-services-4u.co.uk
  • recreation-4u.co.uk
  • recruitment-4u.com
  • refurbishedcomputeruk.co.uk
  • refurbishedlaptopuk.co.uk
  • refurbishednotebookuk.co.uk
  • regional-info-uk.co.uk
  • ringtones-logos-4u.com
  • shopping-guides-4u.co.uk
  • sports-stuff-4u.co.uk
  • studentcomputer.org.uk
  • studentkiss.co.uk
  • studentmachines.co.uk
  • studentmachines.com
  • transport-4u.co.uk
  • usbfactory.co.uk
  • usedcomputeruk.co.uk
  • usedlaptopcomputeruk.co.uk
  • usedlaptopuk.co.uk
  • usednotebookuk.co.uk
  • web-services-4u.co.uk
  • weddings-cebu.com


Google Adsense IDs
  • 3651094595088074
  • 6799658352678478


Reference

--A. B. (talk) 02:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply


  Done --A. B. (talk) 02:57, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply


Crosswiki spammer - Israel based advertising/marketing agency spams for clients

See here for complete file. 212.179.135.224 - 212.179.135.239 is the subrange of this company. spam-urls placed on several wiki's were:

Kind regards, MoiraMoira 08:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

From luxo I get 6 contribution on 4 projects. A bit more info would be more than useful? --Herby talk thyme 08:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
I was still working on it but got a server disconnect. I added the info above in the mean time. MoiraMoira 08:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Short on time but will get to it in a couple of hours I hope, thanks --Herby talk thyme 10:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ok -   Added now thanks - won't log until I can see that resolved, cheers --Herby talk thyme 12:20, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Additional spamming done since my report:

Thanx in advance again for adding these as well (note the dash on the end). MoiraMoira 14:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

OK - some of the last lot done some not (I was adding them as you were editing this page!). I've also fixed the "/" I hope. If no one else does I'll get the rest done in a bit --Herby talk thyme 14:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
  Added the rest --Herby talk thyme 15:17, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Thank you very much for all your work Herby! I have an inkling we haven't heard the last of this company yet and that there will be many more sister-pages in more language to come and block... Kind regards, MoiraMoira 23:00, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

automarkhistory.com

This is ongoing. The statistics say that one user (user:92.113.25.55) has added this link to 22 wikis (66 link additions, all 66 in database by this user).

automarkhistory.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)automarkhistory.com
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry | blacklist hits)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

(see the (upcoming) COIBot report). --Beetstra 09:52, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

I support the request - see the Dutch talk page: here MoiraMoira 09:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

  Added will finish later, thanks both --Herby talk thyme 10:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Dear community, My site automarkhistory.com is the automobile encyclopedia and is called to unite owners of ancient cars worldwide. Unblock please

Best Regards Dmitry Myasnikov— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Richi (talk)


Dmitry, typically, we do not remove domains from the spam blacklist in response to site-owners' requests. Instead, we de-blacklist sites when trusted, high-volume editors request the use of blacklisted links because of their encyclopaedic value in support of our encyclopaedia pages. If such an editor asks to use your links, I'm sure the request will be carefully considered and your links may well be removed.
This blacklist is used by more than just our 700+ Wikimedia Foundation wikis (Wikipedias, Wiktionaries, etc.). All 3000+ Wikia wikis plus a substantial percentage of the 25,000+ unrelated wikis that run on our MediaWiki software have chosen to incorporate this blacklist in their own spam filtering. Each wiki has a local "whitelist" which overrides the global blacklist for that project only. Some of these non-Wikimedia sites may be interested in your links; by all means feel free to request local whitelisting on those.
Unlike Wikipedia, DMOZ is a web directory specifically designed to categorize and list all Internet sites; if you've not already gotten your sites listed there, I encourage you to do so -- it's a more appropriate venue for your links than our wikis. Their web address: http://www.dmoz.org/. --A. B. (talk) 01:19, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

baccara-forever.de

And another cross-wiki spammer:

baccara-forever.de

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)baccara-forever.de
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry | blacklist hits)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

is active at the moment. --Beetstra 14:37, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

  Added thanks --Herby talk thyme 14:45, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

www.seguente.com/

And another cross-wiki spammer for a textile company done via dynamic turkish IP on many wikiedia's yesterday and today - see for file here. Is active at the moment. MoiraMoira 08:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC) IP used (may be related to the one below) was 85.100.170.55Reply

Good catch - won't be as active now :)   Added & thanks --Herby talk thyme 08:41, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

bursahalter.com

Cross wiki. Was added by one of the IPs that inserted seguente.com links too (See: de.wikipedia contributions of 85.107.139.114.)


bursahalter.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)bursahalter.com
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry | blacklist hits)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

IPs inserting the link:

--Jorunn 09:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

tr.wikipedia user inserting both bursahalter.com and seguente.com links: tr.wikipedia contributions Volwerine
--Jorunn 10:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks Jorunn -   Done --Herby talk thyme 10:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

www.provenmodels.com and www.vizads.com

Cross wiki spam for model site. See the various IP addresses from India from which the url was added over and over again on various Wikipeda's here. Kind regards, MoiraMoira 11:33, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

provenmodels.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)provenmodels.com
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry | blacklist hits)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

vizads.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)vizads.com
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry | blacklist hits)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)
Luxo gives me just two edits? Anything more available? --Herby talk thyme 11:44, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
And looking at this suggests other domains are involved? Any en wp folk reporting? --Herby talk thyme 11:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
I just asked our tech wiz RonaldB on Wiki-nl and he reported back thsese are all rather dynamic IP-addies from India (so randomly allocated with each log in session from a huge pool) so that explains each time a new 117.xxx.xxx.xxx number is found spamming. So a block for the site is needed otherwise every where the same spam pops up over and over again from various IP-adresses and we have tosemiprotect aricles. Kind regards, MoiraMoira 13:50, 27 March 2008 (UTC) (mod on wiki-nl)Reply

Fair enough &   Added. I think I was expect an en wp req with some more domains based on the activity there. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Added the next one - vizads.com as well now above - also added by some of the dynamic IP-addies MoiraMoira 13:58, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Ok   Added.
I do "know" who you are & appreciate the help MoiraMoira (check who "welcomed" you :))! Feel free to add ones but can I ask that you do not change the headers for now. Logging is playing up and I am keeping an off line record of the ones I'm doing at present - I would hate to make more than my usual share of mistakes! If I can help I will - regards --Herby talk thyme 14:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

myclassifiedads.net

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)myclassifiedads.net
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry | blacklist hits)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

Same adsense as vizads.com. Spammed to French Wikipedia: [6] [7]. See w:WT:WPSPAM#vizads.com myclassifiedads.net provenmodels.com. 58.170.172.215 03:11, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sorry - missed it earlier -   Done --Herby talk thyme 15:18, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

kizilsungurdefender.jimdo.com/

kizilsungurdefender.jimdo.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)kizilsungurdefender.jimdo.com
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry | blacklist hits)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

Caught in the act now - crossiwikispamming right now via dynamic turkish IP address. Spamspysite pretending to be a computer protecting program. MoiraMoira 15:20, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

  Added by Herby a while ago [8] — VasilievVV 17:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Got distracted - apologies & thanks --Herby talk thyme 17:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Proxy lists

  • www.bind.com Myspace Proxy Server]
  • www.opencity.us Anonymous proxy For Schools]
  • free-proxy.org.ua Free Proxy list. Daily Updated. HTTP, Socks]
  • geexzone.free.fr/ Free WebProxy]
  • www.trproxy.net Proxy]

I found these when clearing out a list of bot-reported spam links. I see a lot of lists like this on proxy articles, all of which are SPAMHOLE candidates. Should we consider blocking sites that are just lists of proxies? JzG 19:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Was that crosswiki spam? — VasilievVV 04:57, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

www.josefov.com/ and pevnostjosefov.wz.cz/

Commercial and sponsored tourist sites placed by one IP-address from Jaromer CZ, 84.244.94.234, currently on 6 Wikipedia versions repeatedly on 25, 27 and 28 march. Now active again.

www.josefov.com/

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)www.josefov.com/
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry | blacklist hits)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

pevnostjosefov.wz.cz/

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)pevnostjosefov.wz.cz/
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry | blacklist hits)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

Kind regards, MoiraMoira 08:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks &   Added --Herby talk thyme 08:56, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

www.worldmapfinder.com.

Just wander over to User:SpamReportBot/cw/www.worldmapfinder.com. The list is huge, over 150 links added. Any idea of what is going on? Seems like a bunch of IPs and a guy named "WorldMapFinder" on ko wikipedia has added a bunch of links... Is this legit? My suspicion is its not, but I could be missing something :S —— Eagle101 Need help? 21:52, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Proposed additions (Bot reported)

Talk:Spam blacklist/XWiki BotReported

Proposed removals

Latest comment: 17 years ago11 comments7 people in discussion

automarkhistory.com

Hello, Dear community, my site automarkhistory.com is the automobile encyclopedia and is called to unite owners of ancient cars worldwide. Remove in blacklist, please —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Richi (talk • contribs) 14:24, 26 Mar 2008 (UTC)

  •   Not done [9], No reason given for unlisting, and we don't normally de-blacklist this soon after addition or at the request of the site owner. Debate is not even archived yet (see above). JzG 21:01, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
  • Reason for unlisting is grantings to users wiki more information on automobile history.All external links to automarkhistory.com strictly thematically, It not a spam.
Richi, please see my response to your earlier comments above. --A. B. (talk) 01:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

commonpurpose.org

I'm proposing the blacklist be removed. I added the links to articles that the webiste has expertise and research on (like "leadership) and was probably somewhat overeager! Happy to remove them, won't do it again! Link is relavent to articles actually about Common Purpose so would like to unlist. Acceptable? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.150.113.250 (talk • contribs) 12:15, 19 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Ok - taking a look at this.
The website seems unencyclopaedic for a start with a preference for selling leadership course - obvious fine that you do that but not relevant to Wikipedias.
Equally the link placement is extensive (seen here). In each case 12 or so links were placed with no regards for the language of the wiki concerned based on the ones I've looked at. Others may wish to comment (the listing request is here). Thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:31, 19 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Endorse refusal to remove. Your edits were extensive and excessive, and you are the only editor using the link (are you related to the link?). You already got blacklisted on the portuguese wiki, so it appears you are more interested in getting the link on pages than to contribute content. We are writing an encyclopedia here. --Beetstra 15:16, 19 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
  Not done - thirded. Come back in a month or so, and we can look at the situation again. —— Eagle101 Need help? 20:19, 19 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure I see a lot of reason to come back in a month. That's because we don't normally remove domains from the spam blacklist in response to site-owners' requests. Instead, we de-blacklist sites when trusted, high-volume editors request the use of blacklisted links because of their encyclopaedic value in support of our encyclopaedia pages. If such an editor asks to use your links, I'm sure the request will be carefully considered and your links may well be removed.

This blacklist is used by more than just our 700+ Wikimedia Foundation wikis (Wikipedias, Wiktionaries, etc.). All 3000+ Wikia wikis plus a substantial percentage of the 25,000+ unrelated wikis that run on our MediaWiki software have chosen to incorporate this blacklist in their own spam filtering. Each wiki has a local "whitelist" which overrides the global blacklist for that project only. Some of these non-Wikimedia sites may be interested in your links; by all means feel free to request local whitelisting on those.

Unlike Wikipedia, DMOZ is a web directory specifically designed to categorize and list all Internet sites; if you've not already gotten your sites listed there, I encourage you to do so -- it's a more appropriate venue for your links than our wikis. Their web address: http://www.dmoz.org.
--A. B. (talk) 03:35, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

islamhouse.com

I'm not familiar with the rest of their site, but they have a translation of the Qu'ran using the N'Ko alphabet that would be a useful addition to the External Links section of the article on Wikipedia:N'Ko. Can it be removed? --Wikipedia:User:SteveFoerster 72.83.183.30 15:48, 24 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

There was quite a bit of link placement from here (see here). Equally I guess going to en wp whitelist (w:MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist) is maybe the best thing to do. The question I would ask would be "are there reliable alternatives?" for what it's worth. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 14:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

lyrikline.org

I found this sit blocked at the german wiki (wherein it has as projekt an own entrie!). it won the grimme-online-award for best website in the category culture, an is indeed the best source for lyrik i know webwide. it is blocked on meta-level, so I have to place my request for unblocking in here. would be greatful if you could unblock this site (I'm not the only user asking why this site is blocked). all the best 85.178.228.96 09:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Cross wiki link placement in January (here) led to this. You could seek whitelisting on de wiki I guess --Herby talk thyme 09:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Troubleshooting and problems


Discussion

Latest comment: 17 years ago64 comments22 people in discussion

Local blacklisting vs. global blacklisting?

Now that there is a local blacklisting capability, the question arises as to when to blacklist locally and when to blacklist here.

My personal opinion is that Meta should remain the primary venue for blacklisting. It's hard to predict who's going to spam more than one Wikipedia. While we now have a tool to find a given spam ___domain on the 57 largest Wikipedias, it remains problematic to find it on the 200 smaller Wikipedias or the other 450 to 500 Wikimedia projects (Wikiquote, Wikisource, etc.) There's value to all these other projects in listing stuff here.

I think the local blacklist option is good when one project wants a ___domain blacklisted and another project wants to use it. This happens occasionally when a given spammer makes himself intolerable on one project while the link is being used appropriately on other projects.

What do others think about this? --A. B. (talk) 03:08, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Generally speaking, I agree with you. I don't have a big problem with local blacklisting on a particular project as a way to immediately interrupt a spammer in progress, but standard procedure should probably be to follow that action up with a request for meta blacklisting.--Isotope23 20:42, 31 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
As a crosswiki admin if I see spam pages created or bunches of links placed I immediately add them to local blacklists that I can access. It's quicker and easier than coming here (where I have not always been helpfully received) and there is at least one or two sites that I've blacklisted that have apparently valid links on en wp for example - just my 0.02 --Herby talk thyme 07:21, 1 August 2007 (UTC)Reply
See Spam blacklist/About and use the block with the smallest possible range. Now local blacklists are available it's not worth the work of blocking here and potentially causing side-effects in hundreds of wikis until there is an established pattern of cross-wiki spamming. Perhaps automatic rejection until at least five wikis have been spammed. And not automatic acceptance after five, just eligibility. Jamesday 20:46, 8 August 2007 (UTC)Reply
Interesting idea - how would you know a site was blocked by five wikis say? They do not tend to be well used (local blacklists) - I'm about the only one who adds to the 4 I have access to. The principle is fine - the practice? --Herby talk thyme 10:08, 9 August 2007 (UTC)Reply
Metric criteria are nice I think. I don't think however we need to say "blocked from five or more wikis". I think that it is just okay "five or more wikis were spammed". Currently, my personal criteria is very low though - spamming to two or more wikis regardless languages (both sets of i. enwiki and enwiktionary and ii. enwiki and dewiki are enough for me, I mean). --Aphaia 10:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)Reply
I am with AB on this: we should use meta as both the main blocking list and also a forum where people go to see if someone has been causing a wider problem. Otherwise it becomes impossibly complicated to block from here and the argument "it this a nasty spammer who xyz" becomes "who abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz". --AndrewCates 12:55, 23 August 2007 (UTC)Reply
  • reset

In the past I've not been well received on this page so have tended to avoid it and operate local blacklists where I have the rights. However I am increasingly interested in this as at least a clearing house for queries influenced in part by A.B. I have posted to a couple of Foundation mailing lists & I'm hoping to hear other views. I'm happy to review/discuss possible spam issues here whenever I'm around - cheers --Herby talk thyme 13:07, 23 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

If we don't blacklist by default here, then there should be a list or some mechanism (perhaps a bot) that tracks all the entries on the local lists so that other projects can check their links against what's been spammed elsewhere.
Ideally, the bot (or human volunteers) would also run periodic checks using a faster, expanded version of http://tools.wikimedia.de/~eagle/linksearch to see if locally blacklisted links are showing up on any of the 700+ Wikimedia projects. (I say "faster, expanded" since that tool checks up to the 57 largest Wikipedias and may take several minutes when checking 57).
Also, it's hard to rule out cross-wiki spam when our best tool just checks 57 of our 700 projects.
--A. B. (talk) 14:01, 23 August 2007 (UTC)Reply
PS, Call me lazy, but maybe it's just easier to just blacklist by default here as opposed to setting up a new coordination system.--A. B. (talk) 14:01, 23 August 2007 (UTC)Reply
When I was involved into the maintenance of this list, some years ago, I got such complaints by email periodically. It takes a time to reply them courtly but firmly. I think this kind of complaints are better to deal by the local people at first. Also I'm afraid this list affects too much websites. So I don't support "anything on meta and at first" tactics. And as for maintenance, this page is huge and editing is a pain. Single-website affecting spams are better to go to their local list, I think. --Aphaia 07:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC)Reply
Aphaia, right now, it seems like this list is running pretty smoothly without much admin effort. As for its maintenance, that doesn't seem to be much of a problem now. As for e-mails, I'm not an admin, but because I make so many requests here, I get them too. I just refer them back to this talk page, suggesting that they make their case here before a wider audience; I also make sure at least they get answer from me here if not from others. The admins that work on this list seem to have thick skins, are undeterred by complaints and are always willing to do the work. As for this list affecting many websites, you're right and that argument cuts both ways. This list also protects many web sites from known spammers.
In any event, what's the mechanism we're using for coordinating to ensure that spammers locally blacklisted in one place aren't spamming in another? Who's doing this work now? We must have a system in place to track this before we deprecate this list to use for proven cross-wiki spam only.
A useful parallel is the whole open proxy issue. For several years, different projects have battled open proxies separately resulting in a large duplication of effort. An open proxy blocked on fr.wikipedia (perhaps our best OP-fighters) would then be used by other spammers, vandals or POV-pushers to cause problems on nl.wikipedia or ja.wikibooks. Only now is there some convergence on a meta-level solution. Meanwhile, we seem to be moving in the opposite direction with spam. Meta has a critical role to play here, whether it's blacklisting globally or just tracking globally to catch cross-wiki spam. Either way, we must not abdicate our role and our responsibility (especially to the smaller wikis which have proven so vulnerable to spam). --A. B. (talk) 17:16, 5 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Here's another time to blacklist at meta: links to blatant copyright violations. For example, when the domains associated with this discussion all finally get identified, they should probably be blacklisted here even if we only find it on one project. That's because these sites are all blatant violations of different magazines' copyrights; we can't afford to have links to these sites if we can help it. (See the discussion of "contributory infringement" at en:Wikipedia:Copyrights#Linking to copyrighted works and en:Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry). --A. B. (talk) 23:34, 7 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Agree completely - I do think we need to hammer out some approach to Meta blacklisting policy probably by extended/clarifying this. For anyone new arriving here (Meta sysop or another project user) this page is frankly unhelpful. My time is under considerable pressure at present but I do see this as a high priority and any help will be appreciated.
We would be able to clarify cross wiki spamming as a concept, the fact that some site should probably be blocked at a Meta level anyway such as above or sites that may compromise machines etc. We can also make blocking url shorteners a policy for example --Herby talk thyme 08:00, 8 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Besides of all ... I eventually found this page: Spam blacklist policy discussion. Since this discussion is lengthy and it becomes clearer we need to have a global policy of inclusion for maintaining this page, are we better to move the discussion place? Or better to stay here? --Aphaia 22:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'm for here, because if it's spam to one wiki odds are it's spam to most of them. Say, you have a marketing company that uses aggressive JavaScript, if each user on en.wiki who has been there complains, odds are it'll still be aggressive to fr.wiki. Yamakiri 23:03, 9 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ok - I agree with Yamakiri's point generally. If they spam one wiki they probably aren't useful to another one (& if they are whitelisting is an option).
However (& thanks Aphaia - I must have found that page in the past because I'd got it on my watchlist) we have Spam blacklist policy discussion & Spam blacklist/About and yet still no real clarity about policy or help for those who are not used to these pages be they admins or other users. My postings to both Foundation-l and the list for Meta met with nothing much so I guess it is up to us to hammer out guidelines policy etc. Until early October my time will be limited but I'll do what I can. I think it may well be worth a fresh start rather than trying to make changes to what we already have? --Herby talk thyme 11:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

My 2 cents. I'm sysop at 7 wikis. I would always use local blacklist (for instance, a spanish page isn't likely to be spammed on russian wiki), but if I see crosswiki spam as I JUST spot for [10], I'd come and global block. Local lists exist for a reason, and it's easier to keep track of. Global list should be used only when global blocking is needed. drini [es:] [commons:] 14:17, 11 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Beyond the 57 Wikipedias searched by Eagle 101's cross-wiki search tool, this blacklist is also relied on by 650+ other Wikimedia Foundation wikis (Wiktionaries, other Wikipedias, etc.). So for Spanish projects, there are these additional targets for Spanish-only spammers for which we don't have much visibility unless someone manually runs a linksearch ___domain-by-___domain, project-by-project:
That or if we're lucky and Luxo's x-wiki user search tool finds the spammer using the same IP or user name on other projects. (That tool is sometimes off-line; at other times it misses contributions on some wikis).
I think another, less important factor to consider is how non-Wikimedia sites might use a ___domain. All 3000+ Wikia wikis plus a substantial percentage of the 25,000+ unrelated wikis that run on MediaWiki software have chosen to incorporate this blacklist in their own spam filtering. A site selling an obviously bogus get-rich-quick scheme or magnetic underpants as a cancer cure has no value to any of our projects nor to any of the 1000s of other wikis our blacklist affects. You might as well do everyone a favor and globally blacklist such a site even if it appears on just one Wikimedia project. --A. B. (talk) 15:27, 11 October 2007 (UTC)Reply
Picking up Drini's point, local blacklisting is great. However it is dependent on admins locally being
  1. Aware of it
  2. Understanding regex adequately
  3. Being interested in the prevention of (inappropriate) external links
If any of those criteria are absent then so is local blacklisting effectively.
Equally on A. B.'s point, there are some sites that just aren't needed by the Foundation (or most other folk) such as the batch of adult sites I just added. In such a case it matters not whether they spammed one or many wikis they should be listed here not locally I think.
We do need a sharpening of policy (referred to above) which - when excess time is available! - I certainly aim to take a look at. --Herby talk thyme 16:10, 11 October 2007 (UTC)Reply
Coibot's monitor list is quite efficient at spotting crosswiki spam, however it requires that someone actually look at the reports and notice it (as I did with uarticles.blogspot.com, which was recently meta-blacklisted). It has a 'stalk page' feature which picks up domains added to watched pages using the spamlink template.. I imagine it could stalk the local mediawiki blacklist pages as well. I'm a bit reluctant to give it more tasks at this point as it and it's related linkwatchers are resource intensive, consuming about 2/3rds of the resources on a 4proc/4gig Sun Ultra80. --Versageek 16:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)Reply
Local blacklisting is good for preventing abuse, and it's not a bad idea to reserve this list for those sites which are unambiguous and likely to be widely appreciated as a blacklist service by most or all local admins, such as the porn and meds spam domains and URL redirectors. JzG 19:03, 1 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

What would people think of renaming the spam blacklist to something a bit less inflammatory for people? This came up on a discussion from otrs from handling people that are upset that their links get put here etc. I'm not saying any of them shouldn't be here, but if it was called something else it may make people less upset. External link exclusion has the benefit of moving the emphasis towards our own editorial decisions, rather than labeling their site also. The message being that we don't think these links are right for an article/project page, not they are *spam*. Anyway, I'm not married to that name or anything. - cohesion 01:58, 6 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

External link blacklist is clear. Hillgentleman 02:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
Unless a proper redirect is set up (not just an article redirect), such a move is going to break thousands of third party mediawiki installations. Most people using the spam blacklist extension will have this in SpamBlacklist_body.php:
$this->files = array( "http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spam_blacklist&action=raw&sb_ver=1" );
Angela 02:23, 6 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
I think a name change is a good idea, provided it can be done properly as Angela has pointed out.
Hillgentleman's "External link blacklist" sounds good and "External link block list" sounds still less perjorative.
--A. B. (talk) 03:09, 6 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
I like block list better. People think everyone (google etc) use this list, and maybe they do, but the more we can make it seem like we're not publishing a spam blacklist for the whole internet the better, I think. (while still providing the service to external sites as Angela notes, which I think is good of course.) :) - cohesion 13:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
I would certainly like to see this change, it would save quite a lot of confusion (& some offence I guess). "External link block list" would be my choice too --Herby talk thyme 08:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
What should we do to move this forward? People (spammers) constantly email otrs complaining about libel, slander etc wrt this being called a spam blacklist. I'm not saying it should work any differently, but not having that terminology would be very helpful. And apparently google and others do use this a lot, according to them anyway. - cohesion 20:50, 1 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
People can complain as much as they want :). You may want to change error message, but it's not enough reasonable to rename — VasilievVV 20:29, 7 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
I am weighing in very late, I know, but I favor the name "External link exclusion list". Both "spam" and "blacklist" have strong negative connotations that unfortunately cause hurt and upset, and which make cause editors to not list things here that probably should be listed here.--Jimbo Wales 19:07, 23 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Linksearch tool

In the event that others aren't familiar with it, there is a linksearch tool available on toolserver. I've added it to the text for special:linksearch on Meta, for convenience. ~Kylu (u|t) 22:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Correct, and I'll be working on making it faster over the next few weeks :) —— Eagle101 Need help? 20:19, 19 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

en:User:Shadow1 and I are working on the linkwatchers. At the moment we are running them on 722 wikis (which is 'all' by the count of about one and a half week ago). User:COIBot is watching these 722 wikis, and reports when a link is on its monitorlist (and those links are generally there when it is spammed, see the explanation on en:User:COIBot). On the english wikipedia we use a spamlink template for reporting external links, which directly links to a number of search engines, and to a number of reporting systems, including COIBot. Would the template be of interest here? --Beetstra 09:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

A link to the template would be useful? Getting reporting a little more consistent on here would make our lives a little easier too - it is not always clear what the extent of the problem is (nor sometimes the exact site name). Thanks --Herby talk thyme 10:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply
I created a version of that template here a few months ago: Template:Spamlink. It may need to be updated with the latest, greatest features - but it is here. --Versageek 11:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply
I have updated the template to a more meta-like form. When you use '* {{spamlink|example.com}}' it displays the next line:

example.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)example.com
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry | blacklist hits)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

In order:

  1. First what is in the template,
  2. Linksearch for meta and the 5 big wikis (en, de, fr, en.wiktionary, fr.wiktionary, see Table of Wikimedia Projects by Size),
  3. 'LinkReport' is a report generated by an IRC bot by Betacommand, it is a save of a current linksearch on en.wikipedia.
  4. 'COIBot Linkreport' contains a summary of all use (by not-whitelisted users) on all 722 wikiprojects on Table of Wikimedia Projects by Size, since the moment of blacklisting/monitoring (see en:User:COIBot for more info).
  5. Eagle's spam report search searches for reports on en.wikipedia spam archives, and here as well I think.
  6. interwiki link search: 20 and 57 search in resp. the 20 and 57 biggest wikis.
  7. LinkWatcher search searches in en:User:Shadow1's database (only en at the moment, probably at some time also for more/all wikipedia).
  8. Wikipedia search searches for the existence of the page with the url name on en, de and fr.
  9. google search searches for info on the site on google.
  10. Veinors pages contain also link-addition information
  11. domaintools gives info on the ___domain
  12. AboutUs.org gives info on the ___domain
  13. Yahoo backlinks, search engine results.

I guess it contains pretty much all the tools needed to investigate the link, latest additions and current use. Hope this helps. --Beetstra 12:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Looks good - we'll see how it goes as it gets used. Given the nature of it I'll probably semi protect it I think - thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:43, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply
I think it is protected (or did you just do that?). --Beetstra 12:55, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply
By the way, to keep yourself more or less up to date, you can watchlist User:COIBot/LinkReports, that gets updated when COIBot saves a report (about every 5 minutes). It may get you one step ahead of a spammer (though take care interpreting the report, COIBot sometimes picks up links by mistake). --Beetstra 13:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply
Protection - yes (when I am around I am not generally slow!). As to watching (& for me) the honest answer at present is "no time" - I would consider myself pretty active on three wikis at least so I tend not be short of work. When I get time I will check it out and see what I can do - thanks for your work & regards --Herby talk thyme 13:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Enwiki's blacklist ?

I just remind our sysops, that urls shouldn't be added here to stop "enwiki's spam". They have their own local blacklist, and listing urls here because they got spammed there is causing problems at other wikis. Please leave this ONLY for crosswiki spam, and direct enwiki petitions to en:MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist (this because [11] ) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Drini (talk • contribs) 20:41, 16 Feb 2008 (UTC)

For reference: Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2007/04#Intellectual_property_dispute_.2F_deathcamps.org. --Jorunn 22:05, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
In fairness if you look at this page any time you will see that the regulars here always point to local black & white lists unless there is cross wiki evidence, thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:00, 17 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
Doesn't hurt to remind, herby. I see a lot of sites still blacklisted globally due to enwiki incidents (specially older ones). drini [es:] [commons:] 23:37, 18 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
Sure Drini - some of them could do with removing (if we knew which ones!) but those around at present won't list anything that is solely en wp as far as I know, --Herby talk thyme 08:05, 19 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
For those with OTRS access: We have another complaint about death-camps.org, related to the reason it was blacklisted initially. --Versageek 23:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
  • I was just coming to ask the same question. I thought we blacklisted both to prevent the war? I just blacklisted on enwiki anyway, but this was widespread cross-wiki. JzG 18:51, 3 March 2008 (UTC) 18:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
I'm not going to express an opinion on the merits of either deathcamps site other than to note that if a copyright concern about either or both site justifies blacklisting on en.wikipedia, then it justifies blacklisting on every Wikimedia project. Copyright issues are a function of:
  1. the suspect site's content provenance
  2. copyright laws where our servers are located (in this case, Florida, USA)
These apply regardless of either their site's or our sites' languages.
We also list some other domains universally even if they show up on just one Wikimedia project: URL shorteners such as tinyurl.com. --A. B. (talk) 03:46, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

French Wikipedia

I think french WP has problems and I hope is not a global problem of WP. This page (sorry, I was obliged to copy the original page in my website so that you can see) : "absurdité wikipedienne : la vérité décrétée par vote" http://www.tree-logic.com/WP_pourriel.htm. ) is considered by french WP as a spam. I think this page is absolutely necessary for the discussion of what should be a real encyclopaedia. It contains no aggression against WP. And why it shoud be a spam ? Because the page quotes Diderot, the inventor of the word "encyclopedia", to show that french WP is wrong when it refused to include alive knowledge, emerging knowledge ! Even more pernicious : a french scientific success 20 years ago (More than 100 articles in the press ) is refused because it was not published as french official academics do ! But official academics refuse to speak about french private inventions. And the pages of french WP are closely controlled by them !

I am an AI expert (Artificial Intelligence). Please read the french pages : Intelligence Artificielle, systèmes experts, Maïeutica and the discussion pages (I'm "JeanPHi85"). You will see the tremendous efforts that I made to obtain acceptation of 4 successive proposals.

I hope you are not an academic ! Please, answer me by email (my email : jpl@tree-logic.com) and not in discussion pages. One of these academics, Sylenius, clears my texts that does not like. In the page of "Petit Djul", a WP fireman (a high school student !), he even confessed to have hacked my website to create a link without my permission! Then he erased this confession. 82.250.145.94 09:48, 16 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

As this site is not listed on Meta can you please take this to the appropriate page on fr wp (fr:MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist I guess). Meta is not in a position to deal with local issues, thanks --Herby talk thyme 10:13, 16 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Testing?

How do I test if this is working on my wiki? --72.226.39.245 02:09, 20 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Add an item thatis on this blacklist to a page on your wiki. If it won't save, its working. If it lets you add the link, its not working. —— Eagle101 Need help? 08:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Help needed

Dear all. Eagle 101 and I have been working on bots in the spam IRC channels (see #wikipedia-spam-t for talking, people there will be able to steer you to the other channels; #wikipedia-en-spam and #cvn-sw-spam). The bots are now capable of real-time cross wiki spam detection (and soon that will also be reported). It would be nice if some of you would join us there, and help us cleaning etc. as this appears to go faster than we at first expect (and I do get the feeling the en wiki is not a good starting point for finding them! --Beetstra 21:35, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Something interesting for ya all to look at. I'm going to work on making each link go to subpages, and have them updated in a way that we can comment on the subpages as well, and bring the ones that need blacklisting to the meta blacklist. I can't have the bot automatically post here, we would flood this list out, so we will have to look at them all and then link to them. Hopefully we can get all the reports in one place, the coibot reports etc. Folks more or less simple crosswiki spam is easily detectable. :) —— Eagle101 Need help? 22:55, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Bah, you probably want to see the subpage at User:SpamReportBot/test ;) —— Eagle101 Need help? 23:00, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Addition to the COIBot reports

The lower list in the COIBot reports now have after each link four numbers between brackets (e.g. "www.example.com (0, 0, 0, 0)"):

  1. first number, how many links did this user add (is the same after each link)
  2. second number, how many times did this link get added to wikipedia (for as far as the linkwatcher database goes back)
  3. third number, how many times did this user add this link
  4. fourth number, to how many different wikipedia did this user add this link.

If the third number or the fourth number are high with respect to the first or the second, then that means that the user has at least a preference for using that link. Be careful with other statistics from these numbers (e.g. good user do add a lot of links). If there are more statistics that would be useful, please notify me, and I will have a look if I can get the info out of the database and report it. The bots are running on a new database, Eagle 101 is working on transferring the old data into this database so it becomes more reliable.

For those with access to IRC, there this data is available in real time. --Beetstra 10:40, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Log weirdness

I guess it may be a caching issue but for me the log appears to end at July 2007? Editing gave me March 2008 but it ain't there now for me? --Herby talk thyme 12:16, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

I've rv'd myself for now but something is going wrong??? --Herby talk thyme 14:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Looks to me like you put the log entry in the right section, I'm re-adding it for ya. Did you purge? ~Kylu (u|t) 16:28, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Agreed in a sense but just purged the cache & it cuts off at July 2007 for me (I even tried making it #March 2008 and got de nada). Is it just me - it has been "one of those" days :) --Herby talk thyme 17:02, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
I don't see past July 2007 either :\ Mønobi 17:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
https://wikitech.leuksman.com/view/Server_admin_log#March_26 - issues with the rendering cluster again (which would keep &action=purge from working) ~Kylu (u|t) 17:40, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Did the full ff purge & still have the same as Monobi today. I am recording the entries that I cannot log at present but I guess if this is not resolved soon alternatives of some sort may be needed. If anyone else finds (or does not find) the same it would be good to hear. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 08:46, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Leave me the log entries you want added on my talk, and I'll add them for you if you'd like. I can get around this problem. :) ~Kylu (u|t) 14:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

XRumer spam

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Well, anyone who is involved in crosswiki spam, has at some point seen Xrummer (is the best!) spam. Now he hotlinks a thumbnail for his program, as seen on [12]. Code he's using: 

X-Rumer is the BEST! 
 
<img>http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/6b/XRumer_screenshot.gif/200px-XRumer_screenshot.gif</img>

So I added the following line: \bupload\.wikimedia\.org\/.*XRumer_screenshot\.gif\b to blacklist all links to possible thumbnail sizes. although I don't know if I did it properly (and the logging system used here confuses me). So, could anyone here review if I did it properly? es:Drini 19:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Spam_blacklist&oldid=934876"
Return to "Spam blacklist" page.