Jump to content

MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/January 2012

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

Proposed additions

[edit]

logicmuseum.com

[edit]

This site is already blacklisted on it's old host as �mywikibiz\.com/Directory:Logic_Museum� - it has it's own domain now. Should that be blacklisted as well? - MrOllie (talk) 19:05, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

rationalwiki.org

[edit]

RationalWiki is often used as a reference in Wikipedia articles despite wikis not being considered reliable sources under Wikipedia standards. RationalWiki was listed on the XLinkBot Revertlist, but this has not corrected the problem and people are still adding references to the site in articles. The people whom are adding RationalWiki to articles are likely members of RationalWiki. I do not hide the fact that I have ties to RationalWiki and one of its rival wikis, but I simply want what is best for Wikipedia, and I feel it is best for Wikipedia if this wiki is added to the blacklist as I can think of no legitimate reason for the site to be linked to from Wikipedia. If a need to link to it arises in the future, it can be removed. PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 00:57, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

cheap-microsoft-office.com and other scam sites

[edit]

Obviously a scam site (the "Microsoft Partner Networks" logo at the bottom is bogus), and a domain that probably never will be able to be used by a reliable source. Blacklist because it was added to Microsoft Office.Jasper Deng (talk) 01:20, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IP addresses of websites:
  • 91.224.160.0/23
  • 95.143.192.0/20
    • 94.143.193.0/23

(the latter 2 sites are in the last range named above). The latter 2 were added to Autodesk.Jasper Deng (talk) 01:33, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

duanelinklater.com

[edit]

duanelinklater.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 - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

Identical spam has been added to Cape Spear by various IP addresses since April. Page protection is not appropriate because other IPs make legitimate edits, including reverting the spam. The user has been warned (see User talk:66.206.234.192 and various edit summaries) and individual and range blocks have been tried and work only temporarily. XLinkBot doesn't work because edits removing the spam are simply undone. Station1 (talk) 06:22, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

musicpopcorn.com

[edit]

musicpopcorn.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 - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

See WikiProject Spam report MER-C 11:51, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

asiansnakewine.com

[edit]

See previous request; spammer is using an additional mirror to circumvent the original block. --CoJaBo (talk) 03:14, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. I tweaked the regex to catch the new variant. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:46, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

avoiceformen.com

[edit]

Various Australian IPs have been adding this men's rights activist blog/website to articles. The targetted articles of this sneaky vandalism include BLP subjects. One of most concerning thing that often citations (to the BBC/ABC for example) are actually altered to link to an attack hosted on the voiceformen website rather than the original source.[1][2][3][4] I semi-protected one article that was affected, but today I have noticed that other articles and other IP addresses have been involved, over a period of time, and depending who has been critiqued on the blog. I cannot see that this website could even be considered a reliable source, and the dangers considering some of this sneaky vandalism took almost a month to be noticed, suggest to me we should simply blacklist it.

--Slp1 (talk) 15:17, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Related --Guy Macon (talk) 16:31, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
plus Added to blacklist. This looks like a clear-cut easy case. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:48, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]


bel-staff.com

[edit]

howflyhiphop.com

[edit]

howflyhiphop.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 - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

Sockpuppet network originally added links to howflyhiphop.com mixtape articles inline on the pages of many various rappers. It's been added to Xlinkbot, but it doesn't seem to be effective at all. Now that the original accounts have been banned for sockpuppetry, various broad ranges of IPs have added links to a wide range of rapper articles, and it's rarely caught until I do a search. The closing admin at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Thatlife/Archive recommended blacklisting if the spamming continued. [Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2011_Archive_Oct_1#howflyhiphop.com WikiProject spam link of initial report] Falcon8765 (TALK) 21:11, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

voyage-en-inde.org

[edit]

See WikiProject Spam report MER-C 07:05, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MooMinder and BurrenSteel

[edit]

Removals: [5], [6], [7], [8],

91.189.64.131 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot) 193.128.83.244 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot) 192.131.85.207 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot) 192.131.85.210 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)

Two companies located in Tubber, Ireland. Moominder is a startup, ready to release its first article in 2012. BurrenSteel is a company that makes gates, fences and the like, but does not have proper website. Both companies use the article clearly for promotion. Night of the Big Wind talk 01:40, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

slaters.co.uk

[edit]

Repeated addition of this clothing retailer to a number of articles over the past three months. --Bob Re-born (talk) 13:40, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

varshabioscience.com

[edit]
1, 2, 3
4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
13, 14
15, 16, 17
18, 19, 20

Twenty entries since August. Jojalozzo 22:21, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dinsdoc.com

[edit]

I suggest adding "dinsdoc.com" to the blacklist.

The domain "Dinsdoc.com" apparently used to have online copies of old books, but has now become a spam link. Example, http://www.dinsdoc.com/niebuhr-1-30.htm

It seems any URL at that domain just leads to ads.

That was reported on ANI [9]. I removed the link from around 65 articles (most here) - it was just a convenience-link, so I was able to remove them without it impacting on verifiability.

As of now, the link is not used in article space [10]

Cheers,  Chzz  ►  08:13, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

eventspakistan.blogspot.com

[edit]
Previous incidents
Sites spammed
  • redirects to:
  • blacklisted locally
Spammers

See WikiProject Spam report for the rest. MER-C 05:29, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. I updated the regex to include the blogspot link and optional hyphen. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:36, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

swagbucks

[edit]
Resolved
FYI MER-C (talk · contribs) suggested �swagbucks\.com[/?], but I don't want to edit the page myself... might break something :P CharlieEchoTango (contact) 21:43, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That should work. Another might be �swagbucks.com[/?]\w+� to require something behind the ? or the /. Has there been a problem with spamming of these referral links? ~Amatulić (talk) 21:53, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't call it a spam problem, but there has been history of abuse on the article I linked above, abuse that is likely to continue given the nature of the website. Is there a better solution other than blacklisting? CharlieEchoTango (contact) 22:15, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
An alternate solution is the User:XLinkBot revertlist. That's a bot that automatically removes links when they are added, but doesn't override editors who revert the bot. You decide.... you may as well get your feet wet at some point and wade into this list or that list. Adding either regex above won't break anything. Just be sure to log what you do as instructed at the top of the blacklist or XLinkBot page. ~Amatulić (talk) 01:16, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I plus Added to the blacklist and logged it. Thanks! :-) CharlieEchoTango (contact) 01:41, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Proposed removals

[edit]

indianholiday.com

[edit]

indianholiday.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 - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

I was trying to add the externals links on the Indian Holiday Pvt. Ltd. page when I found out the website URL was blacklisted. I've traced it back to March 2008, to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/log#March_2008 where no specific reason is given for the blacklisting. As a company profile page will warrant a link to the website as used in a standard profile page at Wikipedia, I reckon it's important enough to unblock the company website URL from the blacklist for the sake of the information. I have referred to other websites and company profile here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Travel_and_holiday_companies and almost every article provide external link to the company's official website. Thanks. Nikhilchandra81 (talk) 06:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for blacklisting is this: See WikiProject Spam report. We are amenable to whitelisting the homepage or "about us" page. MER-C 05:51, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for looking into my request. I suppose whitelisting the homepage will serve my purpose. If you do whitelist the homepage, could you please let me know when can I use it in the article? One more thing that I would like to ask is do I have to make a separate request here - whitelisting the homepage or "about us" page- or is it enough that I have requested it in this very section. Thanks again! Nikhilchandra81 (talk) 04:53, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Normally you would post a request on the whitelist page. However, since you already started out here, you can state either here or there which of those two pages you prefer to white-list. The admins here monitor both this blacklist talkpage as well as the whitelist talk page. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:41, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Amatulic. For the use in the page which I am trying to create, I would request you (moderators) to please white-list the home page of the indianholiday.com Further, I'd like to give you the link of the page where I intend to use it here: Indian Holiday Pvt. Ltd.. This is the first draft and some addition as in content and references are yet to be done. I have submitted it for review and hopefully get some quality advice to proceed further. Thank you in advance Nikhilchandra81 (talk) 12:53, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I see a problem. The article is currently not in main article space. It's in your user space at User:Nikhilchandra81/Indian Holiday Pvt Ltd, and may not survive a deletion proposal if it gets moved into main space due to its promotional tone.
Second, we need a specific page to whitelist. What is the exact URL of the home page? We cannot whitelist www.indianholiday.com because that would whitelist the whole site. www.indianholiday.com/index.html may work although any random string appended onto the domain name appears to redirect to the home page.
Let's see how the article survives in main space. If it does, you may renew this request. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:15, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well considering your feedback regarding how the page will fare in the main space, I think I better take my time to improve it's quality. Do you think the references I have provided are adequate or do I need more. Further as advised I will make sure that the tone of the article is more encyclopedic than promotional. Also, I'll let you know when I will move it to main space. May be a day or two. If it does survives, I'd be glad if you'd whitelist the About Us page. Thaks again! Nikhilchandra81 (talk) 11:11, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unicoi.com

[edit]

unicoi.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 - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
and the old site for unicoi: dspos.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 - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com I will upfront and say that I am newly employed by Unicoi Systems. I was surprised to find our website blacklisted by Wikipedia Administrators presumably for a lack of notability. I was hoping to update the "Fusion RTOS" listing on the the List of real-time operating systems page when i first ran into the issue. Others have had similar experiences in the past (see Ghettoblaster's user page). After looking at the log entries for unicoi.com and dspos.com, I can see that the title in both instances is "Unicoi Systems, Inc. Spamming Wikipedia", and multiple deleted pages of Unicoi products are referenced. I am not sure why DUKG.org and simonvr.com were blacklisted by A. B. alongside dspos.com. (See this diff edit). As mentioned before, I am an employee of Unicoi and would be happy if our products could be listed on Wikipedia. Yet I understand Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia and not some advertising website. However, given that we are a reputable company with some notability, I do not see why our website or product pages should remain blacklisted. Consider that we were given an Excalibur Award from TAG in 2009. (In fact, TAG has given us a "Top 40 Innovative Technology Company" award each year from 2007 to 2011). We were also mentioned by Analog Devices in 2007 (See Converging on the Sweet Spot at the Wayback Machine (archived 2008-12-26)). We've also been featured on Bloter.net, a South Korean online media outlet specializing in information technology. If these citations are not enough, perhaps I can find more before you make the decision.Dtate888 (talk) 00:52, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One correction - it was blacklisted because the link was spammed to multiple articles. And regarding 'would be happy if our products could be listed on Wikipedia' - we are not an advertising service, see WP:SPAM. You may want to try to write articles (without the links first) in your userspace, and then see what others think about the subjects. I hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:21, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Beetstra, thanks for the speedy response. I think I understand what you mean. It seems we were "removed" from List of operating systems#Unicoi Systems and other places, though not completely. Please consider that I was not personally affiliated with those "spamming attempts" and have come to this page in order to "go about this the right way". I have no intention of spamming/advertising, etc. and subsequently having my account blocked. Anyway, I have created a page: User:Dtate888/Unicoi_Systems. It's very short, but relatively neutral I believe. Please take a look and/or let me know how best to proceed. We may not have the same level of notability as some of our competitors, but I think that we do have some. If we were listed on Wikipedia with our own article, or at least were un-blacklisted and allowed to add references to our products like the Fusion RTOS, then that would certainly help our notability I guess..! :) I think it would help with our search engine rankings too, b/c Wikipedia entries seem to always come up first these days. Dtate888 (talk) 00:33, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Your entire response indicates clearly that your goal on Wikipedia is promotional, which is not aligned with Wikipedia's goal to build an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a platform to "help [your] notability". Nor is it a promotion channel to highlight your products. Therefore, this request is no Declined.
You may propose your draft article over at Wikipedia:Articles for creation and see if the community believes it merits inclusion in Wikipedia. There is no need for it to have external links to the company at that time. If it is suitable for main article space, then you may request white-listing of a specific page on your company web site (such as the "about our company" page) over on MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist. There should be no need to link to your product pages; if these products are notable, there should be independent reliable sources describing them. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:50, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Amatulic for the thoughtful reply. I have actually already been told at the Help Desk that Unicoi is not notable enough to have an entry. Since you suggested it, however, I will probably submit my draft article to Wikipedia:Articles for creation.
On another note, I still think that we should not be blacklisted since we are a legitimate entity. Having an article on Wikipedia is a different issue from being blacklisted. Our reputation is tarnished by being on the blacklist, and I had hoped that this could be reconciled somehow. If we were to become un-blacklisted, I would like to update our listings on pages like List of real-time operating systems. I try to be clear with my motives because I do not want to be deceptive. I know Wikipedia is not an advertising service and I will respect that. Dtate888 (talk) 16:52, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please read WP:CORP, which describes various criteria for inclusion for Wikipedia articles about companies. If you can propose an article that includes coverage by multiple independent reliable sources (not trivial mentions, press releases or other self-published material), then the article would likely be a keeper.
As to your other point, well, blacklisting is a consequence of spamming. The company had a choice to collaborate responsibly with the project, but chose instead to spam. Therefore Unicoi is now blacklisted. The company must live with the consequences of its actions. It is appreciated that you are upfront about your conflict of interest. Please understand, however, we don't (and shouldn't) remove sites from the blacklist at the request of anyone with a conflict of interest. If a trusted, high volume editor deems the site worthy of de-listing, we would consider it. We would also consider requests to white-list specific pages on the site. The company "about" page could be white-listed for inclusion on list of real-time operating systems perhaps, assuming that it meets the WP:CORP threshold. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:56, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thankyou Amatulic for the thoughtful, speedy reply. Thank you for the compliment. Unfortunately, since I am affiliated with the company, and since Unicoi has little notability, I suppose it is doubtful that we will be removed from the blacklist unless a trusted editor happens to come across this proposed removal case and suggest Unicoi be de-listed. Nevertheless, it's easy enough for me to submit the article to Wikipedia:Articles for creation like you said to see if other people have thoughts or ideas. Perhaps one of them will either have suggestions about the article or taken interest in suggesting Unicoi.com to be removed from the blacklist.
For the record, my draft article contains all of the independent (or at least partially independent) sources I was able to find at this point, namely the old "Analog Devices" article, and the TAG awards article/video. (I'm not sure about the Bloter.net one since it's in Korean :\ ). The Analog Devices article does specifically mention our "Fusion RTOS", so I believe that may be grounds for inclusion in the whitelist. I suppose the best link for inclusion in the whitelist would then be "unicoi.com/product_suite_pages/fusion_rtos_product_suite.htm". Then I could add a reference to the list of real-time operating systems page whilst still abiding by the WP:CORP (If it's not notable) policy. Dtate888 (talk) 20:18, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

affidavits.in

[edit]

affidavits.in: 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

A blog providing free formats of affidavits,power of attorneys bonds etc.I was trying to include external links to this website. really sure why it's showing as blacklisted. Not quite sure about the procedure for proposing a whitelisting so I hope I'm doing this right.

no Declined. This was recently added to the blacklist due to rapid spamming to several articles. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:10, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

indiemusicfinds.com

[edit]

indiemusicfinds.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 - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

A blog providing reviews and release information of various independent artists. Not really sure why it's showing as blacklisted. I was proposing to add it as an external resource to the Indie Rock article as it's become quite an authoritative resource. Not quite sure about the procedure for proposing a whitelisting so I hope I'm doing this right.

It was blacklisted in November 2009 due to repeated spamming by a batch of IP addresses in the 81.*.*.* range. The question on whether a blog has actually become an authoritative resource is something to be addressed at WP:RSN. If the community agrees it is authoritative, you can propose specific pages to be whitelisted on MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist. Otherwise, WP:ELNO still applies; therefore, this request to white-list the entire domain is no Declined. ~Amatulić (talk) 01:55, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

nightandfog.co.cc

[edit]

This website was created for an English Project on the Film, Night and Fog, in order to be a study guide for those not familiar with the Film, and for those who want to know more information about the context of the film and why it was made. It was created as a group project for a freshman English class at Georgia Institute of Technology. I think the reason it is being blacklisted is that it uses a free domain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajmalkunnummal (talk • contribs) 07:29, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The reason it is blacklisted is because all of *.co.cc is blacklisted globally, not just on the English Wikipedia.
No rationale has been given for white-listing this site. It's unlikely that a non-notable class project that isn't a recognized authority on Night and Fog (film) would be an acceptable external link on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:External links for further guidance. Therefore, this request is no Declined. ~Amatulić (talk) 02:05, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

independencia.net

[edit]

independencia.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 - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

It's the official website of one of the main political parties in Puerto Rico. It includes biographies of several of its members, which have been prominent politicians. I noticed the blacklist when I added a reference to the article on Fernando Martín García, but it could be used as one reference for other articles on similar leaders of that party. I just read here apparently why the site was blacklisted. I don't think that one user spamming is enough to blacklist the site. Thief12 (talk) 05:46, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Defer to Global blacklist. Independencia.net is not blacklisted here on Wikipedia.
Also  Defer to Whitelist for white-listing specific pages for use as a source in a single article. ~Amatulić (talk) 08:27, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From Spain - Request to be unlisted

[edit]

Dear Sirs;

I saw our site on this wikipedia report:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:COIBot/LinkReports/servifans.com

I don't know th reason of this situation but I suppose anybody from Marketing Dpt. was doing this actions not valid under Wikipedia rules.

I apologise for all the inconvenience and I request to be unlisted from any Wikipedia report. Also, I take actions inside the web for don't repeat this situation again.

Your sincerely, Joaquin Masas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.150.143.245 (talk) 13:45, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Defer to Global blacklist. Servifans.com is not blacklisted here on Wikipedia, it is blacklisted globally. However, it is unlikely that a request for unlisting on Meta will be successful. Generally sites are not removed from the blacklist at the request of someone with a clear conflict of interest. If a trusted, high-volume editor makes such a request, then it will be considered. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:10, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear user; Thank you for your answer. I would really appreciate if you can help us to a high-volume editor make a request to removed from any blacklist.

We are people from tourism industry. We are not involved in wikipedia or world wide web rules.

I apologize for all inconvenience again.

Your sincerely, Kim Masas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.150.143.245 (talk) 20:03, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

no Declined We don't need tourism advertising sites on Wikipedia, period. The "high volume editor" part meant "if a high-volume editor suggests the link independently, not on your behalf." OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:12, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sirs;

Thank you for your answer. So how we can repair this situation?.

Your sincerely, Kim Masas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.150.143.245 (talk) 14:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot repair this situation. You must live with the consequences of past actions.
Furthermore, no trusted contributor has come forth to offer a reason why a link to servifans.com would have any editorial value on Wikipedia. This would be the only valid reason to remove it from the blacklist. If a blacklisted site has no value to Wiki projects, there is no reason to remove it from the blacklist. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:04, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

wikiwealth.com

[edit]

wikiwealth.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 - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

Dear Wikipedia Admins,

I noticed that www.wikiwealth.com is blacklisted. WikiWealth.com is a collaborative research wiki that produces research reports for stocks, Exchange-traded fund (ETFs), mutual funds, currencies, and commodities. WikiWealth.com is powered by Wikidot and does not spam anyone. So I hope Wikipedia admins will remove it from the blacklist.

Best regards, Artimonier (talk) 16:21, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Odd - this is in the blacklist, but I see no log entry.
In any case, the claim "does not spam anyone" is false; see the COIbot report which clearly shows someone apparently affiliated with the site mass-spamming Wikipedia. Please explain for what purpose should this be removed from the blacklist? If it's for the same purpose as the original spammer, I'm inclined to deny this request. ~Amatulić (talk) 08:33, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
no Declined for lack of response. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:02, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

sermonaudio.com

[edit]

sermonaudio.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 - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

Folks,

While the domain sermonaudio.com is blacklisted, it is not listed in the log. SermonAudio is a professionally run web service hosting audio for church sermons and teaching. I have been a member for some years and have never seen the site create (or be used for) spam. While this is my first report of a proposed removal, I don't see any obvious reason in the COIBot report to suggest why it's been blacklisted. If there's something obvious to an Admin, I'll look forward to your response and clarification here, to help me better understand the mechanism.

FWIW, my intention to link to it is simply to link to a page showing the messages for a particular church. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carehart (talk • contribs)

The web site at sermonaudio.com was being inserted into our Excommunication article as recently as last November: [11] and [12]. Since these additions were made by an IP-hopping editor from the 75.* range you can form your own judgment as to whether they were in good faith. See article history for several previous attempts, all of which were reverted by the regular editors. I decided to apply semiprotection to prevent further insertions. An editor at User talk:75.137.110.254 was blocked in 2008 for repeatedly inserting the link.
The following template can be used to track other uses of sermonaudio.com:
sermonaudio.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 - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com .
I would not be in favor of undoing the blacklisting. EdJohnston (talk) 06:47, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
no Declined. The missing log entry is an oversight. Had it been logged, it would likely list Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2008_Archive Sep 1#sermonaudio.com as evidence. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:42, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

uncensoredinterviews.com

[edit]

uncensoredinterview.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 - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

I've been helping to edit the article for the band Frightened Rabbit, and given their lack of widespread popularity, it can be very hard to find an adequate citation if one is blocked. A story that the band describes was important to their start, and it needs to be said. Without uncensoredinterviews.com being available for me to use as a citation, I don't have the ability use the bit. Now, I'm probably wrong as to the customs for putting a new entry into Wikipedia, but I was fairly sure that most things need citations. I assure you that this site isn't spam (or so I hope), it contains quite a bit of valuable information about less popular bands, and if it is possible, could this site be removed from the list, or at least an explanation of why it was put on it in the first place? The evacipated (talk) 23:15, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done (1) Site was spammed by multiple accounts over a two year period until it was blacklisted. (2) Frightened Rabbit has plenty of references, so it's not as obscure as you suggest. If there is a single specific interview you feel contains information not otherwise existing in the current refs, you can propose whitelisting it at MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:44, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I will. Thanks for looking at my proposal though. The evacipated (talk) 04:06, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/January_2012&oldid=1109400717"