Legality of Cannabis by U.S. Jurisdiction

"Wikipedia:Spam-blacklist" redirects here. Not to be confused with Wikipedia:Spam blacklist or Wikipedia:Spam-blacklisting.

    Mediawiki:Spam-blacklist is meant to be used by the spam blacklist extension. Unlike the meta spam blacklist, this blacklist affects pages on the English Wikipedia only. Any administrator may edit the spam blacklist. See Wikipedia:Spam blacklist for more information about the spam blacklist.

    Instructions for editors

    There are 4 sections for posting comments below. Please make comments in the appropriate section. These links take you to the appropriate section:

    1. Proposed additions
    2. Proposed removals
    3. Troubleshooting and problems
    4. Discussion

    Each section has a message box with instructions. In addition, please sign your posts with ~~~~ after your comment.

    Completed requests are archived. Additions and removals are logged, reasons for blacklisting can be found there.

    Addition of the templates {{Link summary}} (for domains), {{IP summary}} (for IP editors) and {{User summary}} (for users with account) results in the COIBot reports to be refreshed. See User:COIBot for more information on the reports.

    Instructions for admins
    Any admin unfamiliar with this page should probably read this first, thanks.
    If in doubt, please leave a request and a spam-knowledgeable admin will follow-up.

    Please consider using Special:BlockedExternalDomains instead, powered by the AbuseFilter extension. This is faster and more easily searchable, though only supports whole domains and not whitelisting.

    1. Does the site have any validity to the project?
    2. Have links been placed after warnings/blocks? Have other methods of control been exhausted? Would referring this to our anti-spam bot, XLinkBot be a more appropriate step? Is there a WikiProject Spam report? If so, a permanent link would be helpful.
    3. Please ensure all links have been removed from articles and discussion pages before blacklisting. (They do not have to be removed from user or user talk pages.)
    4. Make the entry at the bottom of the list (before the last line). Please do not do this unless you are familiar with regular expressions — the disruption that can be caused is substantial.
    5. Close the request entry on here using either {{done}} or {{not done}} as appropriate. The request should be left open for a week maybe as there will often be further related sites or an appeal in that time.
    6. Log the entry. Warning: if you do not log any entry you make on the blacklist, it may well be removed if someone appeals and no valid reasons can be found. To log the entry, you will need this number – 735469124 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.

    Proposed additions

    sandeepatre.com / socialigence.net

    Two connected sites (see this) spammed by multiple IPs on multiple articles. I have removed all links I found but they will no doubt try again. Thomas.W talk 07:50, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    starity.hu

    Unreliable Hungarian celebrity gossip site, copying material from other sites with little to no fact checking. It was added to huwiki's blacklist on March 15. – nyuszika7h (talk) 10:23, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    huhudesign.com

    huhudesign.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

    • Spamming by multiple single-purpose accounts, e.g.:

    [[1]], [[2]], [[3]], [[4]], [[5]].

    plus Added MER-C 11:35, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    giftcardspromocodes.com

    giftcardspromocodes.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

    • Spamming by multiple single-purpose accounts, e.g.:

    [[7]], [[8]], [[9]], [[10]], [[11]], [[12]], [[13]], [[14]], [[15]], [[16]], [[17]], [[18]]. . . Mean as custard (talk) 14:48, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Mean as custard: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:01, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    99acres.com

    99acres.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

    99Acres.com is an Indian real estate portal. (It appears to have some connection to job portal Naukri.com ‎and maybe education portal Shiksha.com, none of which are reliable, and are also worth keeping an eye on for spam). All or almost all edits by the above accounts have been inserting refs or straight links to 99acres.com at various Indian real estate and geography articles. Very little positive activity.

    I've added a link to spam.99acres.com to all accounts I've identified, but there are surely ones that have been removed without warning or comment by others. I removed a bunch of links a while ago, but spamming continues at a steady pace, and I just removed several dozen more over the last couple of days. I have seen a couple of likely good-faith uses of this site, but only a couple. Grayfell (talk) 00:09, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 00:21, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Gethucinema.com

    gethucinema.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

    As of this report I see about 50 uses of this site in various Indian articles, but it's like every other cookie-cutter blog we see. User Gethuviki added it here. His name is very suspicious. IP 49.206.126.121 added it here (Geo: Hyderabad, India; ISP: Beam). User Editor milton added it here. User Johnsoft123 added it here to an article that was, the next day, edited by Editor milton[19]. Actually, as I look through Editor milton's edits, most of them involve Gethucinema.com in some way, so I'll be indeffing on that basis and reverting his edits. None of them achieve even the most basic of standards:

    Gethu Cinema wrote, "This movie for the audiences who unaware of zombie." And rated 3 out of 5. Diff
    Gethu Cinema stated, "This movie comes with new attempt in tamil cinema, can only enjoyable with friends." And rated 3 out of 5. Diff
    Gethu Cinema stated, "This movie comes with a plot that entertains this trend youngsters." And rated 3.5 out of 5. Diff
    Gethu Cinema stated, "This movie tries to convey a certain impression by the Director Ravi Arasu." And rated 3.25 out of 5. Diff

    Looks like he's on autopilot here. Using a meaningless excerpt, an incomplete sentence rating, and then a link to the blog.

    That should clear up the bulk of this problem, but we might keep blacklisting on the table, since the other accounts and IPs could be involved. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:25, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Cyphoidbomb: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:56, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    casinolegend.co.uk

    casinolegend.co.uk: 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

    webtechcoupons.com

    webtechcoupons.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

    plus Added MER-C 12:59, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    agreenalternative.org

    agreenalternative.org: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

    I have left a message on your talk page as this link is not a spam. --Vernapullam (talk) 11:12, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    When three separate user accounts have added links to the website in the past month as their sole contribution to Wikipedia, it seems a lot like spamming. . . Mean as custard (talk) 11:27, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mean as custard: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (Help!) 11:34, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    hongkongescortservices.com

    Pesistent (slow) addition of commercial spam to article Prostitution in Hong Kong‎ by likely same person. See also [28]. Apparently page protection and user block don't help. - DVdm (talk) 12:27, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @DVdm: more than one page, more than one user. plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:33, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    fantasticsomething.tld

    other links by same spammers
    users


    (this stuff is added by some link-addition-only-SPA-IPs - collecting). --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:15, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Beetstra: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (Help!) 11:33, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    georgealexanderlouis.org

    Roving IPs edit-warring to add unofficial website at Prince George of Cambridge.[29] Blacklisting will block the addition but allow us to keep IPs open and the page unprotected. DrKay (talk) 11:39, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @DrKay: I see your point. Two questions: what makes this link so bad, and how much constructive editing by non-confirmed editors and IPs is there actually (editors who would be unable to edit if the page would be semi-ed)?. We could also consider a very harsh application of User:XLinkBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:04, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a wikipedia mirror but with no attribution or acknowledgement that the content is from wikipedia. There are occasional useful new/IP edits, such as [30]. DrKay (talk) 12:17, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @DrKay: I'll do the latter anyway, though first just revert: plus Added to User:XLinkBot/RevertList. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:05, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. DrKay (talk) 12:17, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @DrKay: A, so really of no use. Then this is the better solution: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:28, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Multiple deal sites

    All from the Black Friday Sale article (EU version of the US Black Friday). All domains were added this year to the article and they are absolutely spam links. I removed them earlier this month and the removal was reverted today by the 49.x IP, suggesting someone is watching this to keep their spam links added. Ravensfire (talk) 17:49, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Ravensfire: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:34, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    beforeitsnews.com

    There are a lot of links to this site and a lot of users - whether in mistaken good faith or not - proposing it as a source, with over 250 links, many purportedly as sources including in BLPs.

    There's no way we could ever use this site as a source for anything. User-generated, zero fact-checking, and packed with conspiracist claptrap. I advocate blacklisting to control the problem. Guy (Help!) 15:59, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Cleaned up fomr Mainspace, consensus at RSN so plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (Help!) 14:59, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    bellitere.com and pissedconsumer.com

    Link was added to Gokula (film), an Indian Kannada-language film article here by 115.117.141.72, here by 49.249.92.47, and here by 49.203.208.126. As of this note there are about 20 links across the project. The site redirects to "Four Seasons Sunrooms Complaints and Reviews" at four-seasons-sunrooms.pissedconsumer.com/ which is obviously not a useful source of any kind. Both sites should be blacklisted, and I'll gladly do the honors. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Cyphoidbomb: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:12, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals


    z3.invisionfree.com/The_110_Club

    z3.invisionfree.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

    Reasons for removal:

    1: Horrifico, the sockpuppeteer who has used this link for spam, has not had any known activity since late April. 2: When I attempted to report that the user Gedackt might have died six years ago(this is the only known link I could find related to this), I could not save the edit because this was on the blacklist.

    --R32Forever (talk) 17:55, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @R32Forever: no Declined,  Defer to Whitelist for specific links on this domain. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:24, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    giftcardspromocodes.com

    How can the site be useful It is one and half year old blog based that features useful information about getting gift cards and voucher of leading stores at affordable rate.

    Why it should not be blacklisted I can't find any major spam activities related to this site. Since it is based on coupons and frugal living with "Blogger community", there might be some fellow blogger, who added it's link on some coupon or deal related page.

    Good news, I found the major spam activities you were unable to locate; they are right here.  Not done. OhNoitsJamie Talk 13:45, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Troubleshooting and problems

    Logging / COIBot Instr

    Blacklist logging

    Full instructions for admins


    Quick reference

    For Spam reports or requests originating from this page, use template {{/request|0#section_name}}

    • {{/request|213416274#Section_name}}
    • Insert the oldid 213416274 a hash "#" and the Section_name (Underscoring_spaces_where_applicable):
    • Use within the entry log here.

    For Spam reports or requests originating from Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam use template {{WPSPAM|0#section_name}}

    • {{WPSPAM|182725895#Section_name}}
    • Insert the oldid 182725895 a hash "#" and the Section_name (Underscoring_spaces_where_applicable):
    • Use within the entry log here.
    Note: If you do not log your entries, it may be removed if someone appeals the entry and no valid reasons can be found.

    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 who adds 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. This data is available in real-time on IRC.

    Poking COIBot

    When adding {{LinkSummary}}, {{UserSummary}} and/or {{IPSummary}} templates to WT:WPSPAM, WT:SBL, WT:SWL and User:COIBot/Poke (the latter for privileged editors) COIBot will generate linkreports for the domains, and userreports for users and IPs.


    Discussion

    Blocks made pursuant to spam blacklist hits

    While scrolling through the blocks log, I did notice that User:37.115.213.23 was blocked by Beetstra for spamming but had no edits, edit filter hits or deleted contributions. Only after a while I did realize that it may be recorded in the spam blacklist log, and lo and behold there it was. Based on my initial confusion, I am wondering if blocks executed purely on the basis of that log may warrant a canned block reason, seeing as that log aside from being admin only is little known. Or maybe I am worrying too much. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:44, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Thinking also of 176.119.76.135. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:46, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I block them continuously as they tend to make the spam-blackist-log useless (there is one with about >2000 hits to the blacklist ..). A specialised canned block-reason might be a good idea, I think that is a good plan.
    I also left a note on User:Slakr's page, see whether Procseebot can take 'm out. Something along the lines of 'block the editor if they hit the spam-blacklist log more than xx times withing yy hours. I'll also have a look whether the abusefilter can be an option (throttled system). --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:24, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Pretty sure that using a bot to block accounts hitting the spam blacklist will not be accepted - the list is not entirely free of false positives. A bot reporting to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism/TB2 may make some more sense. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:06, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&offset=&limit=500&type=spamblacklist&user=175.44.7.101 .. one typical example, good half an hour, about 50 hits.
    I have added 'hitting the blacklist continuously' to the block-reason for clarity, but I'd prefer a canned summary (I blocked .. 20 over the last days?). --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:57, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Would a template akin to {{Spamblacklistblock}} help? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:06, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    '{{spamonlyIPblock}} <!-- IP only attempts to add blacklisted links, see Special:Log/spamblacklist -->', or '{{SpambotIPblock}} <!-- IP only attempts to add blacklisted links, see Special:Log/spamblacklist -->' (though I think I prefer the first)? --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:23, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Prefer omitting "IP" because I suspect named users could also perform this kind of spamming. That's why I used the name "Spamblacklistblock". I've also ripped off "OversightBlock" a little. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:26, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Makes sense, though I haven't seen many 'named spambots'. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:49, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    I'll add '{{Spamblacklistblock}} < editor only attempts to add blacklisted links, see Special:Log/spamblacklist -->' to the list. Then we can decide what to put in the template. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:53, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    And I've reblocked Special:Contributions/175.44.7.101 with the new reason. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:56, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    I created the template, may need a bit of work. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:08, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Changed the file. I wonder if this should be popularized/advertised a little. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:12, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Most editors are not aware of the existence of the log (and some not even of the existence of the Spam blacklist/whitelist for that matter, or even the MediaWiki namespace) - I think I am one of the few regularly looking at it. Maybe some selective pinging, but that will be to editors who are here regularly anyway, and likely have this page watchlisted. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:38, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I updated the template to use {{uw-block}} and removed the reference to suppressed information since this has nothing to do with oversight. — JJMC89 (T·C) 16:26, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    source: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist&oldid=735469124