Cannabis Indica

thcscience_admin
"Wikipedia:Spam-blacklist" redirects here. It is 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. All additions and removals are also logged.

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.

  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 regex — 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 - 891028017 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.
→snippet for logging: {{/request|891028017#section_name}}
→snippet for logging of WikiProject Spam items: {{WPSPAM|891028017#section_name}}


Proposed additions[edit]

Nazi Germany SPS/fanboi sites[edit]

These three sites are basically SPS fanboi/user forum sites relating to Nazi Germany, and are regularly used to cite all sorts of major and minor things on a large number of articles. Currently, some editors (like me) do regular culls to remove these links, but a global approach seems to be in order. I asked about what to do about them at the Village pump (policy) page, and they directed me here. Perhaps an edit filter would be a better way of approaching this, but basically I think it would be in the interests of WP to stop people citing from them. How best to do that is the question. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:39, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

I'm not averse to either blacklisting or an edit filter, is there a discussion at WP:RSN on this? Guy (Help!) 07:09, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
feldgrau.com has been discussed long ago here, but do you think we'd need a RSN discussion before blacklisting/edit filtering? Or are we better off having that discussion here? I am happy to mount a case for each one as needed, I don't think it will be too difficult to show that they are not RS. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:22, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
In general, for non-spammed links, we only look at technical controls once there is consensus that a site is not RS. A discussion at RSN is the best place, not least because it gets a lot more eyes than this page. I am sure it won't be hard to demonstrate non-RS, and at that point the next step would be to add tot he reference revert list and/or add an edit filter. Guy (Help!) 08:24, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
That's good advice. I will create threads on RSN to discuss these websites, and then re-post with links once they resolve. Thanks, Guy. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:32, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
OK Guy, that was inconclusive unfortunately, except that there seems to be a pretty clear consensus here that axishistory.com is unreliable and should not be used as a source. Could we talk about blacklisting it? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:07, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Do I sense a reluctance to blacklist these sorts of sites? Is this sort of thing not done? Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:54, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support all per the RSN discussion. The utility of these links is negative. In addition, the pages where the links would likely be added are not frequently watched, so an auto-filter would be beneficial. --K.e.coffman (talk) 11:36, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

DailyStormer.name[edit]

For reasons that should be blindingly obvious, there should never in the history of the planet be a reason for Wikipedia to link to the Daily Stormer. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 23:21, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

@NorthBySouthBaranof: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist, though this may end up on meta at some point. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:12, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

hackforums.net[edit]

hackforums.net: Linksearch en (https) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C X-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Yahoo: backlinks • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com • DomainsDB.net • Alexa • WhosOnMyServer.com

To discourage actions such as this one, there's no reason this should be linked anyway. All links that appear today in Linksearch are a result of that vandalism. -- Luk talk 15:03, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

@Luk: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:13, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

deepdotweb.info[edit]

deepdotweb.info: Linksearch en (https) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C X-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Yahoo: backlinks • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com • DomainsDB.net • Alexa • WhosOnMyServer.com

Repeated spam additions. Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:07, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jon Kolbert: Defer to Global blacklist, cross-wiki problem. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:10, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

qanon.pub[edit]

qanon.pub: Linksearch en (https) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C X-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Yahoo: backlinks • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com • DomainsDB.net • Alexa • WhosOnMyServer.com

Repeated edit-warring by IPs and SPAs at QAnon. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 03:36, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@AlanM1: Defer to Global blacklist, cross-wiki problem. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:10, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
@Beetstra: OK, thanks. Listed at meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#qanon.pub. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 04:31, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
@AlanM1:  Done at meta. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:20, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

femina[edit]

Seems to be an attack website. --Moxy (talk) 23:04, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@Moxy: This is the website of Femina (India). Also subject of a current discussion Here on RSN. --Dirk Beetstra T C 01:19, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Wikibirthdays[edit]

Wikibirthdays says it gets its content from Wikipedia, and I've just cleaned up a bunch of citation spam. This even includes adding spam links to an unrelated template and hitting the same article multiple times (1, 2). Note that the first spam link was not reverted; the same website is spammed twice in the lead section. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:43, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: per the COIBot report: Defer to Global blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:17, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
@NinjaRobotPirate:  Done on meta. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:23, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Advameg sites (city-data.com, filmreference.com, etc.)[edit]

  • Task: To disallow Main article space edits which include links to these sites, and particularly to prevent them from being used as references.
  • Reason: The Advameg sites listed below have been described in many prior discussions as a content farm primarily designed to bring visitors to advertisers. They are often brought to attention in spam reports, reliable sources discussions, and related to copyright violations. The data is not attributed to specific authors, there appears to be no editorial policy, and some data is user-generated - making them unreliable sources. In some cases, they should be considered WP:TERTIARY sources. Below is a (possibly incomplete) list of websites (taken from www.advameg.com/) which should be blocked, along with links to prior discussions involving them that I could find (feel free to add others). --Netoholic @ 17:33, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Site list[edit]

  • americanforeignrelations.com [1]
  • bankencyclopedia.com
  • biologyreference.com
  • chemistryexplained.com
  • city-data.com [2][3]
  • currency-conversion.info
  • deathreference.com [4]
  • discoveriesinmedicine.com
  • drug-data.com
  • everyculture.com
  • faqs.org [5]
    • faqs.org/allusions/
    • faqs.org/childhood/
    • faqs.org/collective-nouns/
    • faqs.org/espionage/
    • faqs.org/health/
    • faqs.org/health-encyc/
    • faqs.org/minorities/
    • faqs.org/nutrition/
    • faqs.org/ologies-isms
    • faqs.org/people-search/
    • faqs.org/sports-science/
    • faqs.org/time/
  • fashionencyclopedia.com
  • filmreference.com [6][7][8][9]
  • foodbycountry.com
  • healthofchildren.com
  • humanillnesses.com
  • lovetheoutdoors.com
    • lovetheoutdoors.com/fly-fishing/
  • madehow.com [10]
  • minddisorders.com
  • musicbanter.com
  • mythencyclopedia.com
  • nationsencyclopedia.com
  • newsearching.com
  • nonprofitfacts.com
  • notablebiographies.com [11]
  • patentsencyclopedia.com
  • photo-dictionary.com
  • pollutionissues.com
  • presidentprofiles.com
  • pressreference.com
  • readabstracts.com
  • referenceforbusiness.com [12][13]
  • scienceclarified.com
  • shareranks.com
  • siteencyclopedia.com
  • surgeryencyclopedia.com
  • thegardenhelper.com
  • trademarkencyclopedia.com
  • unexplainedstuff.com
  • unit-conversion.info
  • waterencyclopedia.com
  • weatherexplained.com
  • whatdoesthatmean.com
    • whatdoesthatmean.com/dictionary/


Discussion[edit]

Moved this request from Wikipedia:Edit filter/Requested/Archive_13#Advameg sites (city-data.com, filmreference.com, notablebiographies.com, etc.). -- Netoholic @ 17:38, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Woohoo .. User:Netoholic, can you please look at MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2007/12#encyclopedia.stateuniversity.com .. that list corrolates to the list below. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:20, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

@MER-C: as above list dates back 12 years ago, and the people who were handling that at that time are not here anymore, maybe you can help to have a look? I will poke COIBot on the domains mentioned there, and below domains should generate reports now at well. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:23, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Advameg sites - full set[edit]

As the request on the edit filter request page (mentioned above) was closed referring it back here, compiling here a full list for tracking and script-assisted blacklisting. Ping Netoholic. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:11, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Adsense and webbugs[edit]

For tracking this, these seem to be common on large subsets of these sites. This links back then to many other sites and cases as well. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:44, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Relisting[edit]

This was archived without action (neither rejection nor acceptance). Relisting for clarity. -- Netoholic @ 20:13, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Proposed removals[edit]


gyangoggles.com[edit]

gyangoggles.com: Linksearch en (https) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C X-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Yahoo: backlinks • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com • DomainsDB.net • Alexa • WhosOnMyServer.com HI! I agree that I violated the rule of "no spamming" by Wikipedia but trust me it was unintentional. I run this blog to share tech news and reviews and to my best knowledge, I was referring to related topics. I assure you, I will avoid it and never ever put my site link. Please give me a chance. Thank you.

 Declined. If you will never again put your site link on Wikipedia, why are you requesting removal? Either way, the link won't get in. If a trusted, high-volume editor requests removal, we can consider it then. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:43, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
@Anomalous+0: Sir, I said that I will never use my site link in another context. If I find my site link relevant then only I will use it otherwise I won't. I didn't know that this type of linking is not allowed and many youtube videos suggest that putting site link in Wikipedia is good for SEO. Now that I know the rule I will never use a link which is not 100% relevant to the topic. Please give me last chance and remove my site from the block list. I will tell other people also to keep Wikipedia clean and not to spam it through a blog post. Thanks.
Sites aren't removed from the blacklist at the behest of their owners. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 23:32, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

ycdtotv.com[edit]

ycdtotv.com: Linksearch en (https) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C X-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Yahoo: backlinks • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com • DomainsDB.net • Alexa • WhosOnMyServer.com

The official site for the cult television show You Can't Do That on Television. Very reputable resource, includes historical data, with sources, and direct interviews and features with cast and crew. It appears it was flagged for spam in June 2010 when the site was moving servers (various features were down for quite some time that summer, I recall). That said, the site has been back in good standing for several years now. It's not as active as it used to be, but still serves as a great resource for up to date information regarding the show and it's related media.--Theonewhoisseveral (talk) 07:18, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

This looks like a fan site to me, not an official site. I don't see anything about being official on the front page of the site, and it is copyright 'The Slime Society', not any TV network or TV production company as I might expect. Also, the header states 'since 1995' when the show was cancelled in 1990. What makes you think this is an official site? - MrOllie (talk) 14:40, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
This was blacklisted in years ago because of spamming and likely copyright violations on the site. How has the situation changed since then? --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:51, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

fineartbartending.ca[edit]

fineartbartending.ca: Linksearch en (https) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C X-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Yahoo: backlinks • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com • DomainsDB.net • Alexa • WhosOnMyServer.com

This is a bartending school website. The school has been operating for 38 years in Vancouver. I see the site was flagged for spam in March 2011 when the site had different owners. The website has been redesigned 3 times now, and the school itself has changed owners twice. The bartending school is independently owned and operated. It is just a small business. The school continues to train students on a weekly basis and refers to cocktail recipes regularly found on Wikipedia.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Winchstone (talk • contribs) — Winchstone (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Oppose Spammed by multiple IPs; links to this site would serve no useful purpose on Wikipedia; that the school refers to cocktail recipes on Wikipedia is irrelevant. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:15, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Ohnoitsjamie, Please provide evidence of 'Spammed by multiple IPs'. Being blacklisted because in your opinion the reference to cocktail recipes is 'irrelevant' seems to be unfair. Please back up any specific references with data. Winchstone 21:45, 2 April 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Winchstone (talk • contribs)
I have a better question: What is your relationship to the website or its operators, Winchstone? —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 23:28, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The spammed links (e.g. Special:Diff/417135666, Special:Diff/418004020) are to blog posts that serve as content marketing for the business. The links were spammed by single-purpose accounts, too. I see no valid use case for links to this domain. — Newslinger talk 23:34, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Troubleshooting and problems[edit]

zenodo.org[edit]

Emergency blacklisting while we work out what's going on with this site, which hosts significant numbers of scientific papers marked as copyright by major publishers (Elsevier, Nature, OUP etc) with no evidence of rights release. Guy (Help!) 18:44, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (Help!) 18:44, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
That is supposed to be an open science data repository. Looks like it is abused. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 21:20, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
It looks to me that the intention of Zenodo is good. Also, many journals now allow authors to post their own papers, sometimes after an appropriate delay. Please get this figured out before too many links are removed, and we have to go figure out how to get them back! Gah4 (talk) 22:03, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes, on their own departmental websites, but the legality of this is highly questionable, since a lot of them are papers published by Elsevieer, Nature and other publishers well known to be evil about copyright. Guy (Help!) 22:23, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
Here[1] is the Elsevier policy. It doesn't sound too evil to me, as long as the use is non-commercial. The APS[2] also has a policy, and I presume others that I didn't look up, also have one. Gah4 (talk) 23:39, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
That is one positive the Citation Bot trims the URLS to the landing page. It makes them shorter (original intent) and it means wilipedia does not link directly to a PDF (unexpected positive). AManWithNoPlan (talk) 22:44, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
I do not understand why we cannot link to the originals in stead of linking to sites where the hosting of content is questionable (and that includes replacing links with appropriate direct links to originals). Even if it turns out to be fine on quite some occasions, there is no pressing need for them, and there is no reason to even consider taking the 'risk'. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:32, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
If people have them on their personal site, or school site, then link there. I was suspecting that these were put their by the author, but actually have no idea how they got there. I just know that I keep seeing on my watchlist links going away, and wondered why. How many such links are there? Who volunteers to find other sites hosting them and change the links? Gah4 (talk) 06:34, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
Around a thousand links, a lot added by one editor who has... issues with the reality of copyright in academia. Guy (Help!) 14:13, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
Probably can get most non-violating content with github links. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 04:53, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with even temporary blacklisting of this. Sure, there are some papers there that shouldn't be, so what? We might just as well blacklist Wikimedia Commons because it also has some content that is copyvio, ditto for Wikipedia itself. Volunteers/staff here and there are doing their best to remove infringing content. That should be sufficient. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:36, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Personal use". Elsevier. Retrieved 6 November 2018.
  2. ^ "Editorial: APS now leaves copyright with authors for derivative works". APS. Retrieved 6 November 2018.
  •  Reopening this discussion was blacklisted as emergency measure and meant to have a resolution discussion. It would not appear that this has had a resolution that would be a consensus for blacklisting prior to being archived. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:34, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
I do not think we can justify any blacklisting without specific problematic cases having been brought up. In the case of Zenodo, its very purpose is (to quote from enwp) "to deposit data sets, research software, reports, and any other research related digital artifacts", so no surprise seeing any of these in there. Even large numbers should not come as a surprise, as depositing in repositories like Zenodo is a requirement by some, not only by journals but also funders and institutions. As for copyright, publishers are not the only ones having a say in this — funders and institutions are included in that as well, as is the country of Switzerland, where Zenodo is hosted. I checked a number of usages on enwp and could not find any that were pointing to problematic content. Based on that, I think we should lift the blacklisting immediately and then discuss on the basis of concrete examples as to whether there is any need for further action. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:12, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Logging / COIBot Instructions[edit]

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 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 priviliged editors) COIBot will generate linkreports for the domains, and userreports for users and IPs.


Discussion[edit]

source: https://web.archive.org/web/20190405035245/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist

Leave a Reply