Tɛmplet:Spam-blacklist header Ŋun su:MiszaBot/config

Proposed additions

Tɛmplet:Spam-blacklist proposed additions

controlmgt.ir

Might not be within the blacklisting rules – but I'm putting it here because of the slow-motion nature of the spamming. This blog, which is entirely in Persian, reviews films and has no encyclopaedic value. First added in September of last year, the user has returned to add it again today. Inserted each time as a fake reference to make spotting it harder, one assumes. 81.187.192.168 (talk) 11:57, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

. The account Tɛmplet:Np2 is globally locked and cannot make any more edits on any Wikimedia project. The Spamcheck report indicates that Bamdadnorouzian is the only user who has repeatedly spammed the link, which means that the global lock is currently sufficient to prevent further disruption. Thank you for reporting this, and please submit a new report if the spamming recurs. — Newslinger talk 02:16, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

overstocktrader.com

Tɛmplet:Link summary Persistent spam from multiple IPs. --Count Count (talk) 11:39, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Tɛmplet:Rto Tɛmplet:Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. Thanks for reporting this. — Newslinger talk 02:21, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

socotraspecialtytours.com

Tɛmplet:LinkSummary Persistent spam from changing ips. --Count Count (talk) 05:55, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Tɛmplet:Rto Tɛmplet:Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:32, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

usacouples.com

Tɛmplet:LinkSummary Spam from multiple ips and accounts, see spamcheck. --Count Count (talk) 06:59, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Tɛmplet:Rto Tɛmplet:Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:31, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

tootifooti.com

Tɛmplet:LinkSummary Spam from multiple sources. Website is only a year old and likely part of a farm to get references on Indian film related pages. Have reverted and warned in the past but most recent is here from an IP. Also note this From March, this from April, and this which was placed in March and removed in April. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:38, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Tɛmplet:Rto Tɛmplet:Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:31, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

monochrome-watches.com

Currently pending at WP:SPI, but may be of interest here. Link to this advertising-heavy blog was mass-added (and mass-reverted) at the start of the month. A new account appeared today and immediately added the same link (with the same edit summary and same spelling errors) to the most recently reverted article. 92.6.27.15 (talk) 21:03, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Note that various pages of this blog are linked in 64 different articles, mostly but not all Swiss-watch related, mostly a references. It is unlikely that it qualifies as a reliable source. 92.6.27.15 (talk) 21:06, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

hi, sorry but I'm not sure then what's wrong in our references for a pure knowledgeable articles? these are all done by me, one person related with blog-founder. If you look at popular Swiss watchmaking topics, various blogs are linked in the references many times, so please explain to me like I'm 5 - what's wrong in my link in reference section with fully knowledgeable article, totally unbiased etc, comparing to other watch blogs linking there? Vanillaretouching01 (talk) 21:15, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Tɛmplet:Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:29, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Simple expanation: creating multiple accounts to spam your link to Wikipedia was a bad idea. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:30, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Ok, I hear you, but when I was doing this from one account, linking the same knowledgeable articles that were adding a lot of value to the topic, I got reverted as well. Althought as I said - other watchmaking blogs are featured multiple times in references under popular topics, sometimes even with a clickbait video link, not an in-depth article full of uniqe information as I did. So could you please advise me, how to do it properly, not to be black-listed etc.? Vanillaretouching01 (talk) 21:36, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

The other blogs don't belong there either. I advise you to find another venue to promote your blog; you're not going to do it here, period. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:38, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

report-accident

Link

Tɛmplet:Link summary

Spammers

Persistent link spamming, please blacklist.-KH-1 (talk) 05:24, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

brandmydispo.com

These are very likely the same editor. ~~I also saw this link added sometime in the past week in exactly the same manner but now can't find my revert of it.~~ The spamming is unusual: the article gets edits in every section, moving words or sentences around, looking like a decent copyedit that just happens to introduce a new reference or external link. But on closer examination, the changes are unnecessary at best and actively harmful at worse, and the intention is to add this link to a sales site with SEO-optimised fake 'reviews' of the products it's selling. Sneaky. 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:7DCA:43EC:BDAF:A739 (talk) 20:14, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: was also added to three unrelated items on Commons – see my reverts. 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:7DCA:43EC:BDAF:A739 (talk) 20:20, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Found my revert from yesterday, added the sock to the list. 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:7DCA:43EC:BDAF:A739 (talk) 20:23, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

genesisbiopharma.co

India-based sales site, being added today as a "helpful link" with associated sales language around it – sometimes to an SEO-optimised 'blog' section of the site. No encyclopaedic value. 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:7DCA:43EC:BDAF:A739 (talk) 21:10, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Proposed removals

Tɛmplet:Spam-blacklist proposed removals

tradingview.com

I was updating a list of energy companies by market capitalization (newcomer thing told me to) and was using the Tradingview stock screener to list them. Not sure why this is blacklisted and I cant find it on either of the lists it told me to check. It is like one of the leading platforms for financial data, not just US markets either. --Sonderidk 16 June 2024

This was blacklisted on the Global blacklist (not here), seven years ago. See the report here. Sam Kuru (talk) 03:31, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

bobfinnan.com

Not sure why this is blacklisted — Preceding unsigned comment added by Senex04 (talk • contribs) 17:00, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Because of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=mediawiki_talk:spam-blacklist&oldid=195131001#bobfinnan.com ~Anachronist (talk) 20:51, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Tɛmplet:Declined to remove for now. If a trusted high-volume contributor requests removal, we'll revisit. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:33, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

ice-clipboard.com

Hello professionals, I have now split my previously bilingual (de/en-US) website: ICE - Ideal Clipboard Expander de/en-US into two separate domains: ICE - Ideal Clipboard Expander de (language de - German) and same address with ".com" instead of ".de" (language en-US - English). Now I wanted to change the corresponding entry in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipboard_manager (Group "List of clipboard software", entry "ICE - Ideal Clipboard Expander") so that it now points correctly to the English-language website, since in the german site is no more the english version available. But when I try to do that I get the message: "Your edit was not saved because it contains a new external link to a site registered on Wikipedia's blacklist or Wikimedia's global blacklist. ". Wikipedia says "The following link has triggered a protection filter:" "c.l.i.p.b.o.a.r.d.com" (without dots) is on a blacklist - but my site is called "ice-clipboard.com". And that is clearly not the same website. What can I do about this? Can one of you perhaps help me. Many thanks in advance --91.48.144.92 (talk) 14:44, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Tɛmplet:Defermetablack. The text "clipboard" isn't blacklisted here, it's on the global blacklist. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Anachronist, thank you for your answer. ;-)

But what can I do about it? My website is not called the same as the blacklisted site and has nothing to do with it. Can I do something about it? After all, Google indexes my site without any problems.

It can't be that "ICE-XXX.com" is blacklisted just because "XXX.com" is on the blacklist. There seems to be a big problem in the programming or the evaluation of the blacklist. --91.48.144.92 (talk) 22:13, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

P.S. I thought that collective punishment had been abolished since the end of WW2.

Mr. Blacksmith is not going to prison just because a Mr. Smith is wanted.

In short, I don't understand the function of the global blacklist. :-( --91.48.144.92 (talk) 22:20, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi there, the selection criterion of Clipboard manager § List of clipboard software section is that that list entries must be "notable". The invisible comment the section, which can be seen when you edit the page, says: "Entries in this list should be notable (WP:GNG) and have a sourced Wikipedia article." As your software application "ICE - Ideal Clipboard Expander" does not appear to be notable per the general notability guideline and there is not already a standalone Wikipedia article about ICE, I am unable to adjust the blacklist/whitelist to accommodate ICE. Please also take a moment to review the conflict of interest guideline when you get a chance. Thanks. — Newslinger talk 02:29, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Newslinger, thanks for your information. I apologize, but for me as an (older) German, it is not that easy to find and understand all the rules and options on Wikipedia.com, since the English lessons at school were a long time ago. ;-)

My program ICE was very popular with german users in the Win98 version V1 until 2000. The new V2 for Win 10 and later (64-bit only) with bilingual GUI, which was released this year, now contains everything that I wanted to implement in the program at the time, but which was not yet possible due to the very limited PC performance.

If I understand you correctly, I am not allowed to create a wiki page for my program myself or link my program to Wikipedia in any other way.

As a small thank you for your information, I would like to give you a free major license for ICE. I am sure that you will love ICE, since ICE makes daily work on the PC much easier. You can simply contact me via the email address provided on my website. --91.48.147.98 (talk) 13:26, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Because you have a conflict of interest, the only venue available for you to publish an article about your program is to write it in draft space and submit it for review. See Wikipedia:Articles for creation for instructions. If the draft is accepted, then we could consider a whitelist request to permit a single page to be linked that would otherwise be blacklisted. The URL to be whitelisted needs to include a path to a specific page on the website, not be a link to the overall website.

Your other alternative is to get the global blacklist corrected. Most administrators here on Wikipedia do not have the ability to edit the global blacklist, so it's pointless to make a request here. That is why, in my initial response, I said Tɛmplet:Defermetablack. The global blacklist clearly has a rule that resulted in collateral damage. You can make a request there to correct it. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:23, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Anachronist, thank you very much for the information. I will follow up on this and then try to create and submit a corresponding page in the draft area. Unfortunately, Google Translator is not always accurate in its translation, so I did not understand your note about the "global blacklist". Google translated "Move the blacklist". When I clicked on your link to the "blacklist", however, I was taken to a "white list" - that confused me.

I would also like to give you a free major license for my program for your help. My program is certainly a great help, especially for work like that on Wikipedia, because it allows you to insert any existing text blocks into applications with a mouse click. Just send me an email if you would like to get a license. --80.130.86.165 (talk) 13:42, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

pv-magazine.com

Tɛmplet:Link summary

Not clear why this domain should be blacklisted. "Miasolé sets new flexible CIGS efficiency record" is cited in Copper indium gallium selenide solar cell and I was trying to fill in with a URL to the news page, but was blocked. — Chris Capoccia 💬 14:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Seconded. Came here to write the same. I also saw this previous request from 2021 MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/March 2021#pv-magazine.com. Apparently the domain is blacklisted from 2011. Definitely time to remove it. {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  ^talk 13:14, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

I was trying to add this link: www.pv-magazine.com/2024/06/06/worlds-largest-solar-plant-goes-online-in-china-2/ to update the List of photovoltaic power stations and this is the most complete source. {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  ^talk 13:24, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

This has been waiting for a while. It is the third request to remove this from the Spamlist and no reason to maintain them on the list has been presented. {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  ^talk 18:14, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Recovered from the archive. Will ping admin noticeboards on this. {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  ^talk 18:15, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

I will third this. I find this to be a very useful source that I often want to cite but am unable to. Please remove from blacklist. Reywas92^Talk 03:47, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Tɛmplet:Reply Tɛmplet:Reply Tɛmplet:Reply The report that resulted in the blacklisting is here: MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/April 2011#pv-magazine.com and it references this WikiProject Spam report. If you search the archives of this talk page for "pv-magazine" you find numerous requests to remove this from the blacklist. The most recent request to delist was in November 2021: MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/November 2021#PV-Magazine; the request was detailed, and it was declined by Beetstra with a correspondingly detailed rationale. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:14, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

OK, thanks. My current example looked more like self-published article from someone with knowledge common across the web than actual spam, but who knows what the rest of the site is. — Chris Capoccia 💬 09:04, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

@Anachronist thanks for the reply. I've read the decline reason but I think it is somewhat out of topic: we are just talking about spamming here. The reliability of the source is another matter and something editors should discuss themselves (maybe at WP:RSN) and is unrelated to spamming links.

With regard to spamming:

- @Beetstra says it was still spammed in 2016. That is 5 years worth of spamming but how could it be "respammed" in 2016 if it was blacklisted in 2011?

- Even if the last occurrence was in 2016 that is still 8 years ago. Is there a rule that clarifies how and when a site should be removed? I don't think it makes sense for those blacklists to be permanent.

I don't see much risk in removing them from the blacklist in any case. Several editors have pointed out they are a longstanding and reliable source in the field. If the link spamming starts again we can block them once again and I guess it will be hard to reverse at that point. {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  ^talk 10:52, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

A decision to de-list a blacklisted site is based not only on risk of recidivism, but also on reliability. The reliability consideration isn't off topic. After all, there is no purpose whatsoever in removing an unreliable source from the blacklist just because somebody asks. The fact that both you and Reywas92 are trusted editors is why we're discussing this instead of simply denying the request.

To your question about being spammed after blacklisting: Attempts to add a blacklisted site show up in the logs when the blacklist filter is triggered.

I suggest creating a case on RSN and reporting back on the consensus. That's the usual process in getting a site de-listed. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:05, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

This is wild, the last incident (however that happened) was 8 years ago! The fact that some of their coverage is adapting news releases does not make them unreliable or unusable, and Beetstra should not be handing down his own RSN decision by himself. Reywas92^Talk 14:59, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

We also generally don't remove a site from the blacklist without an RSN case showing a consensus for reliability. Has that been done? It isn't Beetstra's responsibility to initiate one. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

That feels like moving the goal posts, there was never an RSN case showing it was unreliable! It was blacklisted because it was spammed, not because the site was otherwise bad. Wikipedia:Spam_blacklist says absolutely nothing about having to prove something that wasn't challenged in the first place. If that's the "usual process", you need to add that there. Searching this page's archives for the noticeboard, I don't see instances of this happening, with most links to it being for why something should be added to the blacklist.

There are additional requests to delist pv-magazine in 2018 (four times), 2019, 2019 again, 2020, 2020 again, 2021, 2021 again, 2022, and now. It's time to let editors use it appropriately, and if the site should be restricted for reliability rather than spam, there's a separate place to make that decision. Reywas92^Talk 18:05, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

I tend to agree with @Reywas92‘s point here. Several editors have pointed out this source is reliable and only one admin has disagreed some years ago. I don’t think that is sufficient to conclude that a source should be blanket banned. This is a spam blacklist after all. I think it should be removed and then it can be challenged on a case by case basis or if someone feels so inclined they can open an RSN discussion to declare it unreliable. @Anachronist do you agree? Do you also believe this source is entirely unreliable? {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  ^talk 22:38, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

No, that isn't moving the goalposts, that is the normal process. You can look through the archives of delisting requests. To delist a blacklisted site, we ask for an RSN case. A couple of editors doesn't equal community consensus. Most of what PV-Magazine publishes seems to be "churnalism", scraping other sources to republish them, in which case the original sources should be cited instead. This isn't a vote; we don't discount the valid points given by one administrator just because it's one person. Get a consensus on RSN. That supplies a proper record and rationale for delisting it.

A suggestion was made in 2013 to move the site to XLinkBot to see what happens. @Beetstra: you've done most of the declines for delisting requests, what say you? Also @JzG: because you've been involved in the past also. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:54, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Discussion

While running IABot on a page I was hit with a message that it could not submit the edit(s) due to the domain everyculture.com being blacklisted which I have confirmed. It appears this domain is used in 217 articles on Wikipedia.¹ How do I find out why the domain is blocked and how do I remedy this?

1 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=everyculture&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1 skarz (talk) 16:52, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

This was added to the local blacklist five years ago as part of this request back in 2019. I see a higher count of extant links to this site: 512 in both article and draft space. There's a also an old Wikipedia mirror on that domain - I'll clean up the refs to that. For the rest you can 1) debate the wholesale addition to the blacklist, 2) evaluate the links and whitelist them individually, or 3) remove the links per the logic of the original blacklisting. Sam Kuru (talk) 17:30, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Can someone please fill me in on why, exactly, archive.ph is on the blacklist, but archive.org isn't? I really have no idea why archive.ph would be on the blacklist. It is the second-largest internet archive in existence and, as such, is incredibly useful.--LadybugStardust (talk) 04:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

On a quick search, that does not appear to be on the local or global blacklist, but there are some complicated pattern blocks that may be impacting it. I can see that you hit the blocked list when trying to add "healthyceleb.com", but I do not see anything related to "archive.ph"; can you provide any more specifics on the problems you're running in to with that archive? Sam Kuru (talk) 11:40, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

It was actually years ago when I tried to add it and was told that it was on the spam blacklist. Let me try right now: Okay, that appears to have worked. Did it used to be on the spam blacklist for whatever reason, but got taken off?--LadybugStardust (talk) 16:59, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, archive.today and its subdomains were on the blacklist once. They were delisted in 2016 as a result of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Archive.is RFC 4. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:20, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Phabricator request to remove the spamblacklistlog right from the edit filter helper right

See phab:T367683. –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Troubleshooting and problems