Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Jun

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

http://spam.b-movies.gr

b-movies.gr

Spam sock accounts

193.92.231.118 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
193.92.228.20 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
212.251.122.83 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 00:53, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored and blacklisted on COIBot. IP ranges: 193.92.231.0/24; 193.92.228.0/24; 212.251.122.0/24. --Dirk Beetstra T C 22:23, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.projecthoneypot.org

Adsense pub-6572552607348631

Spam sock accounts

Eastdakota (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
LunaticBeatnik (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
71.213.117.99 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 23:48, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored and blacklisted on COIBot. 71.208.0.0/12 resolves to Qwest Communications Corporation. --Dirk Beetstra T C 22:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

funhowtobooks.com

Spam sock accounts

-- Siobhan Hansa 14:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored on COIBot. 202.184.0.0/15 blacklisted against link, resolves to a business park, the other IPs (60.48.0.0 - 60.54.255.255) are in a large range on an ISP in Kuala Lumpur. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:18, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sigord.blogfa.com spam

Spammed widely crosswiki to C++ and other articles. Just a few examples:

Domains:

Accounts:

Affected articles:

  1. Arman
  2. C Sharp
  3. C++
  4. China Internet Network Information Center
  5. Computer network
  6. Computer program
  7. Iranian blogs
  8. JavaScript
  9. JavaScript
  10. Omid Kordestani
  11. Persian language
  12. Uploading and downloading
  13. Yahoo!

References:

  1. meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#sigord.blogfa.com (Permanent link)

--A. B. (talk) 20:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored/blacklisted on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:04, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

andorraz.org and kwfm.net spam

Spammed links to Andorra-related articles across 37 different wikipedias. Here's a partial sample:

  1. an:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  2. ast:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  3. be-x-old:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  4. bn:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  5. bn:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  6. da:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  7. fr:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  8. it:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  9. lt:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  10. nl:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  11. nn:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  12. pl:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  13. pt:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  14. ru:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  15. sk:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  16. sl:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  17. sr:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  18. uk:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  19. ar:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  20. bg:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  21. ca:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  22. cs:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  23. el:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  24. en:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  25. es:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  26. eu:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  27. fi:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  28. hr:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  29. hu:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  30. hy:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  31. ja:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  32. ne:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  33. no:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  34. oc:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  35. sv:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  36. tr:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  37. zh:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26

Domains:

Account

See meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#andorraz.org and kwfm.net spam (Permanent link)
--A. B. (talk) 20:19, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored/blacklisted on COIBot. IP resolves to 85.94.168.0/21 in Andorra. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:01, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Skin care network links

I noticed that nearly all of Romanbond (talk · contribs)'s contributions were links to sites within the Skin Care Network. Though this set off my spam alarm, I do note that the content is purportedly written by dermatologists, etc., and it doesn't seem to be ad-heavy (yet). Thoughts? OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

monitored/blacklisted on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
fungalguide.ca: 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
--Dirk Beetstra T C 08:01, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

bellicosmetics.com

bellicosmetics.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

This link has been added repeatedly to articles about stretch marks and pregnancy. I got an email from the named user which quoted WP:NOT:

"Advertising. External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they can serve to identify major corporations associated with a topic (see finishing school for an example)."

and stated: "Belli Cosmetics is a major corporation associated with stretchmarks, thus the link is appropriate."

I don't believe that this sort of association is what was intended by that particular statement in WP:NOT. --Versageek 01:41, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

tourismindochina.com spam

Spammed domain

Affiliated sites:

Accounts:

Reference:

--A. B. (talk) 03:01, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored, IPs resolve to broadband providers in Cambodja and Vietnam, user blacklisted against link. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.nbrii.com

Spam sock accounts

NBRII (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
71.240.165.18 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 04:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored and blacklisted, IP (71.240.0.0/12) resolves to a internet provider (Verizon). --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possible spam - Sydneynorthscouts.com

Would it be possible for someone to check out these weblinks [1] that have been inserted by that user and decide weather or not they need to be removed, I am not quite sure, so I would prefer someone who has a little more experience to have a look before these edits are reverted, thanks.--AdamJWC 10:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can be removed per WP:EL, not directly linked to most of the subjects, and WP:SPAM. Monitored on COIBot; IP (60.224.0.0 - 60.231.255.255) is of an ISP in Canberra. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
All reverted--AdamJWC 11:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

healthy heating etc.

68.178.114.159 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) adds domains related to heating to e.g. Underfloor heating. CIDR 68.178.0.0/17 resolves to an internet provider in OR, US (Integra Telecom, Inc.).

--Dirk Beetstra T C 18:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

allprojj

Presario3000 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Both of these domains belong to Jay Blouin / allprojj. A Google search of that organization suggests there are other domains. The weatherinform.info domain was registered today, after the marketing linkspam was reverted twice. I have added these user/domain combos to COIBot. --Versageek 03:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See also FS7600 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Erik Warmelink 06:07, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.ultimatespecs.com

Adsense pub-1439784545900711

ultimatespecs.com

Spam sock accounts

89.180.148.114 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
193.137.203.230 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
87.196.93.13 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
87.196.150.82 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
87.196.123.45 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 18:39, 27 May 2007 (UTC) [reply]

etclinic.com, Crocs Club and mobiWays spam

Links added by one or more of the accounts below:

Accounts adding one or more of these these links:

  1. 192.117.38.14 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  2. 199.203.92.86 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
    blacklisted as a hacked or vulnerable server by the Spam and Open Relay Blocking System
  3. 217.132.146.252 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  4. 62.219.231.58 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  5. 62.219.221.102 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  6. 84.110.234.7 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  7. 84.94.105.204 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  8. 84.94.97.243 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
    Blacklisted as a possible open proxy by dsbl.org
  9. 87.68.57.128 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  10. Tradimax (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • count • COIBot • noticeboards • user page logs • x-wiki • status • LinkWatcher search • Google)
  11. 212.117.137.193 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  12. 217.132.211.126 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  13. 89.138.47.161 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  14. 85.250.52.165 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  15. 89.139.165.93 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  16. 89.139.173.126 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  17. Sam77g77 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • count • COIBot • noticeboards • user page logs • x-wiki • status • LinkWatcher search • Google)
  18. 89.1.9.97 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  19. 84.94.162.160 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  20. 84.94.181.141 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  21. 84.94.97.111 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
    Blacklisted by The Spamhaus Project on its Spamhaus Exploits Block List
  22. 84.94.99.237 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
    Blacklisted as a possible open proxy by dsbl.org
  23. 84.95.91.71 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
    Blacklisted by The Spamhaus Project on its Spamhaus Exploits Block List
  24. 87.68.64.172 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
    Blacklisted by both The Spamhaus Project and SpamCop
  25. 87.68.66.103 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)


Articles spammed by one or more of these accounts:

  1. .mobi
  2. Alternative medicine
  3. Back pain
  4. Cancer
  5. Chakra
  6. Clog (shoe)
  7. Crocs
  8. Crop circle
  9. E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial
  10. Energy (spirituality)
  11. Extraterrestrial life
  12. Faith healing
  13. Fertility
  14. Flat feet
  15. Foot
  16. Footwear
  17. Healing
  18. Migraine
  19. New Age
  20. Prayer
  21. Psychology
  22. Reflexology
  23. Reiki
  24. Shoe
  25. Spirituality

References:

  1. meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#etclinic.com, Crocs Club and mobiWays spam (Permanent link)

--A. B. (talk) 15:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

26 Boyko spam domains

Affected articles:

  1. Biology
  2. Boundary element method
  3. Cartel
  4. Catholicism
  5. CINN-FM
  6. Construction
  7. Credit union
  8. Diplom
  9. Diploma
  10. Endre Ady
  11. Endre Szemerédi
  12. Ephraim
  13. Extrude Hone Corporation
  14. Fard
  15. Honing
  16. Jaki Byard
  17. Juho (name)
  18. Kapi
  19. Raoul Dufy
  20. Salp
  21. SNNS
  22. Stanley Jaki
  23. Template:User degree
  24. Three-toed sloth
  25. Vodou
  26. Wallace Fard Muhammad
  27. Yoga


Domains spammed

All of these domains are just parked domains for sale -- totally content-free except for the parking service's ads.

Domains are registered to Eugene Boyko, Moscow, RU

Accounts adding these links:

References:

  1. meta:Talk:Spam blacklist‎#26 Boyko spam domains (Permanent link)

--A. B. (talk) 21:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spamming of http://spam.malaysiavacationguide.com

Adsense pub-7383117029821400

Spam sock accounts

202.75.160.254 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
219.95.241.3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
210.186.42.33 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
219.95.35.182 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 00:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored on COIBot, IPs (210.186.32.0/19; 219.95.128.0/17 & 202.75.160.0/19) resolve to ISPs in Malaysia (blacklisted).

eserver.org

Requestion stumbled on this when looking into my question, Wikipedia_talk:External_links#Links_to_online_libraries:

"The names of the tc.eserver.org pages are perfect matches to the Wikipedia article names. Hmmm, so I did a little digging. I found out that a Geoffrey Sauer is the director of EServer.org. A User:Geoffsauer created the eserver.org article and has edited his own bio. If you look at his contribs you will see a whole lot of eserver.org external link additions. A bit more clicking shows a bunch of SPA's and IPs from Iowa. Looks like a basic COI spamming to me. There are 322 hits when you take out the "tc." and do a Special:Linksearch/*.eserver.org."

Help would be appreciated. --Ronz 02:35, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

COI notice --Ronz 02:57, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think tc.eserver.org is a valuable resource, and useful when used to provide external links for wikipedia articles. With article talk page consensus of course, either before or after the link is added. There is discussion here:

It's just pure spam, encyclopedic content of the site is debatable, but clearly the link was added with self=promotional purposes in mind, along with articles on the site and the person in charge of it, is all pretty clearly advertising. DreamGuy 05:28, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think you're jumping to conclusions. Do you think Administrator User:Doc glasgow was spamming when he made this edit? [2] Enforcing COI/SPAM is very important, but I think we need to be more careful to investigate these things fully. See my complete comments over at WP:COIN. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jehochman (talk • contribs)
I don't think we should be making Strawman arguments either. Nobody suggested that User:Doc glasgow was spamming and his innocence does not negative that this is a COI spamming. There are 322 eserver.org links, some were added in a legit manner while others were spammed. Maybe it's a 50:50 split, but a whole lot of research needs to be done to determine this. Documentation is important and I suggest adding to the {{userlinks|?}} list that Ronz started up above. No need to start deleting anything, yet that is, the spam isn't going anywhere. (Requestion 18:56, 19 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
I added a couple more socks, last eserver.org add dates, external link count, and some info. (Requestion 00:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
I added 13 more socks that I found. There could be a few more hidding but they will be difficult to find. Note that the 129.186.*.* and 12.216.*.* netmasks all resolve to Iowa State University or to someplace in Des Moines Iowa. I've noticed that linking to the book and text sections of eserver.org is fairly popular with a couple regular editors and I don't consider that to be spam. The current count is 249 external eserver.org link spams. (Requestion 21:01, 21 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
I added 3 more socks. The current count is 254 external eserver.org link spams. (Requestion 17:12, 23 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Added another sock. This a tricky situation involving 24 additions of the antislavery.eserver.org link by a university literature professor. The majority of User:Jlockard's edits added an antislavery.eserver.org link or did repair of that link. Jlockard is suspected of being IP 129.219.46.76 who added 39 antislavery.eserver.org links. See this explanation [3] to a spam fighter back in May 2006. The current count is 278 external eserver.org link spams. (Requestion 06:12, 25 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Per WP:COIN, monitored/blacklisted on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:50, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some related analysis about COI and eserver.org junk links vs. high quality links over at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2007_Archive_May#mitpress.mit.edu_-_Bookuser. (Requestion 16:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

We have contact. User:Geoffsauer has responded over at WP:COIN#EServer.org. Not sure what the resolution is. (Requestion 23:18, 28 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I'm updating the entry at WP:COIN#EServer.org. No problems found so far that I can see. More things to look at still. EdJohnston 04:49, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prostate Massage Page "Spam" Question

Hi Guys,

Im new to Wikipedia and trying to learn the ropes.... I edited an external link in the Prostate Massage page and had it removed after a couple of days. Im being told its spam, i see it as an in depth illustrated resource with original content, that i dont see on Wikipedia. Can some one PLEASE tell me why it would be considered spam?

The editor wont give me any more info as to why its conisdered SPAM aside from telling me to read the guidelines, i read the guidelines and i still dont see it as spam. What makes the link i add any different (spam wise) than any other external link there?

Thanks, Wiki Forever 19:57, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The site that you added to four different articles is a commercial site that sells sex toys. I doubt you'll find similar commercial links on those articles. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:03, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can point time and again to articles like the one i have submitted that are on commercial sites.

Case in point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_ejaculation Most of those external links are on commercial sites. (libida.com, holisticwisdom.com, etc, etc...)

Here as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_sex#External_links . I can also point to others as well if need be. The article pertaining to prostate massage i added, provides actual information and diagrams that are not available any where else.

Seeing these actions on Wikipedia makes me really sad, it makes me wonder sometimes about the partiality on the site, what makes any of the external links mentioned above any better of a reference than what i provided. If someone can actually take a look at this and give their input, it would be much appreciated. As, i have read all the guidelines and still see NO DIFFERENCE!

Wiki Forever 13:14, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Also, on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_sex#External_links (libida.com and holisticwisdom.com have 2-3 listings on that page, how is that not SPAM and self promotion!) They dont exactly sell doughnuts either.

I respect the rules, but the rules should apply to ALL fairly. I think they provide a great resource for wikipedia, but i ask what makes the articles they list (2-3 diff articles on the same page) submitted any different than what i submitted. I again state that, the article i listed was researched and very in depth with respect to prostate massage and a great reference for wiipedia. There was no other listing on the prostate massage page with that kind of info.

76.17.251.220 14:25, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


That last posting from the IP was mine (forgot to login)

Wiki Forever 14:26, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External link to community event

OK, can you guys help me with this one.... I need some clarification on an external link. Should the link to the official Holmfirth Folk Festival site that I added in the arts section of the wikipedia:Holmfirth page have been inserted in the external links section of the page instead? The link was deleted as "business advertising spam" by 82.30.78.230, but I don't see the difference between this and the link to the websites of artists Ashley Jackson or Trevor Stubley that are also in the arts section. I was following the example set there by adding the festival link (possibly wrongly - hence this talk post).

The festival is a community event not a business (although it is supported by the Holme Valley Business Association), the website is relevant and on-topic (being about an annual event in Holmfirth and also being the official site), and contains informative detail (like dates and venues). It does contain links to accommodation, but these are for visitor info, rather than advertising. Having read Wikipedia:External_links and Wikipedia:Spam, the link seems to fulfill requirements. Obviously the site is an advertisement in itself (in terms of raising awareness for the festival), but then so are the abovementioned artist websites, and others on Wikipedia such as the Glastonbury official website.

Any advice/ideas? Tyke abroad 04:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd see linking to the Holmfirth Folk Festival externally being ok in an article dedicated to the folk festival itself; however, Holmfirth the town should not link to it (See Wikipedia:EL#Links_normally_to_be_avoided - number 13). Also, if the festival itself isn't notable enough to have its own article, then it definitely shouldn't be linked on the town's website as well, and I'm thinking thats the case... JoeSmack Talk 07:40, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and I'm removing those two artists' links, as they are in similar territory as you pointed out. JoeSmack Talk 07:41, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that Joe! Tyke abroad 06:29, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising personal details, Campa Cola

  • Im not sure if this is the right place to report it but I seem to be having a problem with an article called Campa Cola. This one user seems to be using different Ip addressed to add company and personal details to the article to help promote this business, this seem to be happening on a daily basis and when I had a look through the page history, it looks as though its happened almost a hundred times before. Would it be possible to have this page locked or semi protected to prevent this from happening. Even though it is a different ip address every time, you can tell its the same person. Please check out these diffs. [4]. You would have to go back prior to my revision.--AdamJWC 05:19, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, this isn't really the right place. I'd suggest finding a common ground and not blindly reverting. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 17:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invisible inkspam

Third one I've seen of these, not sure if they were all the same site. Maybe this is something a bot should be looking for? This guy may have read a lot of Dick Tracy comics, but he should know that rubbing lemon juice on Wikipedia will bring out the secret message. --CliffC 12:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that's cool. I'm surprised the wiki engine allows transparent text. Somebody must not believe in all that "nofollow" stuff. (Requestion 14:32, 29 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Google strictly observes "nofollow"; Yahoo does not -- see this blog post quoting search engine officials. --A. B. (talk) 14:48, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That is what they say but is there any proof? Google has a history of being very opaque about its algorithms and procedures. (Requestion 14:54, 29 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
On top of which all Wikipedia is republished invisible links and all by a hundred or so mirrors like answers.com most of whom don't use nofollow. i.e. Big Google advantage from links on WP whatever we do. --BozMo talk 15:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
comment Somebody is using what he "learned" from Matt Cutts about hidden links [5] ;). Watch out for the other examples as well. A.B., regarding Loren's post at SEJ. Some of the engines "follow" the link as in "go to the page that is linked to with 'nofollow'" and index that page. None of the engines use links with 'nofollow' attribute in their link based ranking algorithm thought. The link does not count as a vote and probably also the anchor text will not be used for determining relevance in some cases. See nofollow (which I extended). My last statement is a speculation, but would make sense. Basically, don't take 'nofollow' literally as in "not go to the linked to page" or "do not follow the link". "dontcount" or "novote" would have been more accurate and descriptive about what the attribute is used for. --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 07:00, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We can speculate on how the engines treat nofollow but it is probably safe to say that the Google Toolbar gives a follow and a vote to every link that is clicked. (Requestion 13:54, 30 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 May 26#Template:FreeContentMeta

This regards the topic of interwiki maps (shortcuts to other non-Foundation wikis that bypass the normal "http://" linking system). For some background, see:

Additional background can be found at:

The contest template creates a special box for links to other wikis; for example:

left|50px|
[Page|CorpKnowPedia] has information related to:
I made a hash of the template, but you get the idea -- the other wiki's logo goes in the upper lefthand corner. The center of the box refers readers to the appropriate page on whatever the other wiki is.
In this case, I'm using CorpKnowPedia as an example (their mission: "document and create a repository of information regarding those nefarious and elusive entities known collectively as corporations").
--A. B. (talk) 14:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Life settlement

-pulled from archive-

71.228.14.6 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (71.224.0.0/12, cable provider, NJ, US) is spamming links to Life settlement after several warnings:

--Dirk Beetstra T C 16:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC) [reply]

A link addition that may be related:
--Dirk Beetstra T C 15:18, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

aboutmyarea.co.uk

The aboutmyarea.co.uk external link started appearing on Wikipedia a couple days ago. All of the socks are WP:SPA's.

Domains

Socks

The 4 warnings were issued and the final warning has been violated several times. The IP's appear to be coming from all over. The aboutmyarea.co.uk site must have some sort of Wikipedia promotion going on. I request bot watch and black listing. (Requestion 21:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I just added 2 more socks (Requestion 21:33, 29 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Added 2 more socks. See User_talk:86.138.224.46 for an interesting message that explains the aboutmyarea.co.uk "national franchise group" spamming. (Requestion 15:44, 30 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Add a sock IP found by User:Beetstra. (Requestion 17:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Monitored on COIBot, don't think blacklisting will help much. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.chakpak.com

Spam sock accounts

60.254.124.243 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
122.167.107.53 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
125.22.44.84 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
202.131.155.13 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
59.144.50.48 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
122.167.111.31 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
122.167.35.251 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
122.167.103.172 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
122.167.100.191 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
122.167.104.231 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 05:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored and blacklisted. IPs (60.254.0.0/17, 122.167.0.0/17, 125.22.44.0/24, 202.131.128.0/19, 59.144.50.0/24) are all internet providers in India. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Linkreports by COIBot

I have slightly changed the report function of COIBot, when we (on IRC) command it, it generates a report with the respective white/black and monitorlistings, and, when there are reports, with the reports (poke us when you want us to refresh the report). I will from now on just add rules to COIBot when links get reported here and generate a report (even if it is empty), and not post when I have added the rules. So when 'COIBot Linkreport' is a blue link, rules have been added (where necessary). Hope this helps. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

COI Carolyn Healey related sites

Spam sock accounts

Carolynh 98 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
--Hu12 22:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.siteseein.gr

Adsense pub-8949636886414823

Spam sock accounts

88.218.44.192 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 00:36, 2 June 2007 (UTC) [reply]

adsense spam http://spam.allgoodarticles.com http://spam.ebooknetworking.com http://spam.downloadfreepdf.com

Adsense pub-1672514986876842

Spam sock accounts

Ravedid (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
--Hu12 00:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yahotels.gr

Related alexandros-skopelos.gr

Spam sock accounts

87.203.190.18 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
87.202.110.39 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
Nikos29ath (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
--Hu12 07:02, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dennisking.org was noticed by User:COIBot as being added by Dking (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). I am not sure if that is related to this. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Changed it, alexandros-skopelos.gr should have been shown instead. --Hu12 08:58, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, done. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:11, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

revver.com

Found this Revver site while going through some links to another video community. Quote [9]: "Share your video across the web. The more people see it, the more money you can make. We split the ad revenue with you 50/50." Linksearch. If anyone wants to take over from here? Femto 20:07, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just like YouTube/G-videos/etc some of the links will be valid and some not. The commercial aspect only increases the likelihood it's invalid and doesn't nessessarly make the link automatically bad. So... what i'm saying is, take your time and be tread with care. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 20:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, there may be legitimate links, as well as links worth to investigate further. I won't have time for that, which is the whole reason I'm listing it here. Femto 20:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.streetfire.net

Adsense pub-4179651296767592

Spam sock accounts

Speedkills20 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
85.101.216.229 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
Usr2007 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
--Hu12 08:36, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.2fastlane.com

Adsense pub-0812785047585593

Spam sock accounts

Usr2007 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
194.106.184.3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
91.148.98.123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
91.148.96.12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
91.143.221.231 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
91.148.97.179 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 08:36, 4 June 2007 (UTC) [reply]

http://spam.mobiletv.net

Spam sock accounts

Usf1999 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Mbajd2000 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
--Hu12 08:51, 4 June 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Wikisummaries?

Does anyone have any insight into wikisummaries.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 ? There seems to be several links to it and I don't know what to make of it. --ElKevbo 03:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Domains - all registered to Brian Risk, Carrboro, North Carolina 27510


Socks


I added some domains and the User:Geneffects sock. Quick rough guess is that more than 100 linkspams have been added over the past year. If found this diff [10] interesting. The text is copied from the wikisummaries.org page word for word. Looks like a copyright infringement but the owner added it. We've got some COI going on too. Nothing has been deleted, yet. Still collecting information. (Requestion 04:09, 29 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

monitored/blacklisted on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 22:06, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
user:Geneffects is still adding wikisummaries.org (Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/wikisummaries.org), COIBot also revealed a Time Warner Telecom IP (216.136.13.66 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log); 216.136.0.0/19), not sure if that IP is involved. Other users 'adding' the link did that by reverting pages (hence unrelated and now whitelisted against link). --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Beetstra. This edit [11] makes me belive that 216.136.13.66 is User:Geneffects IP address. I've added the IP address to the above sock list. (Requestion 15:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]
I added 4 socks to the above list. These domains have now been cleaned. (Requestion 08:20, 10 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

WP:GRIEF

Project members should be aware of this enlightening essay. —Moondyne 14:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, tis a good one. I added a link to it on the main-page. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 16:59, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently others disagree. Oh, well. Kafziel Talk 21:57, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They want to MfD it? That is so wrong. I consult WP:GRIEF daily for guidance in helping lost spammers forward on their spiritual journey. This essay must be saved from deletion! (Requestion 22:46, 29 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
The AfD closed with a result of keep. (Requestion 15:18, 6 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

You know they're hungry for Google love when they spam the Latin wikipedia

One way to find the really bad crosswiki spammers is to pick a very small wikipedia (not in the top 50) from the list of wikipedias, then see who's spamming it. Odds are, they're picking one article, then hitting every wikipedia with that article (as listed in the left hand corner). That's how I found this spam:

Top 57 wikipedias with this spam:

Beyond the top 57, the following also have these links:

In most cases. the links were added by one-edit throwaway usernames, usually with Anglo Saxon names.

The domains' owner according to domaintools.com is listed at various addresses in New York, Philadelphia and the Philippines. Looking for spam using Eagle's interwiki search tool using enimenfanforum.com found lots of it in the top 57 wikipedias. Beyond those, look for links in smaller wikipedias by looking at the list of wikipedias on a spammed article (for instance, Eminem).

Google searching the eminemfanforum.com domain name, I then found a long list list of domains owned by the same owner:

Further searching turned up an e-mail address which led to more domains:

Likewise, some of the sites had links to still more sites owned by the same owner although I had to be careful about assuming ownership since there were also many exchanged links owned by other unrelated, innocent site owners.

Domains confirmed to be owned by this spammer:

Google adsense ID#: 9474678852583214

Accounts (en.wikipedia):

I kept finding more domains owned by this owner and more interwiki spam -- and I did not even search that many web sites and domain names. I suspect there's a lot more out there. --A. B. (talk) 13:12, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisting request:
--A. B. (talk) 14:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked the sleeper accounts, for what it's worth. more:

At least the en: article space should be clear now. Femto 15:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC), 16:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another domain:
  • www.purseboard.com
purseboard.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. B. (talk) 17:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've searched and cleared all the smaller wikipedias (below the top 57 covered by Eagle's interwiki search) -- can someone help with the top 57? I'll move on to clearing the smaller wikipedias on the new batch below.--A. B. (talk) 04:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
All of the first 39 have been cleaned up across all wikipedias as far as I can tell. --A. B. (talk) 12:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A few more (109) from the same guy

References:

1 to 10

  • www.aishwaryaraifan.com
  • www.amandapeetforum.com
  • www.amyelizabethfisher.com
  • www.angellocsin.org
  • arnoldaloisschwarzenegger.com/link.html
  • www.ashleesimpsonclub.com
  • www.bachelorfan.com
  • www.bigbrotherfansite.com
  • burberryworld.com
  • www.captainbarbell.org
I've cleared the smaller wikis (below the top 57 searched by Eagle's interwiki search). Can someone clear the bigger wikipedias? I'll move on to the smaller wikipedias in the next batch of 10. --A. B. (talk) 04:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've cleared domains 1 to 10 and 91 to 109; still need help with 11 to 90. --A. B. (talk) 02:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

11 to 20

  • www.cassieforum.com
  • chanelworld.com
  • www.cherylburke.net
  • www.christianbautista.org
  • christinaaguilerafan.com
  • clayaikenforum.com
  • www.danitykanelyric.com
  • davidblainefan.com
  • www.demimoorefan.com
  • dixiechicksonline.com
Domains 11 to 20 cleaned up across all wikipedias. --A. B. (talk) 13:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

21 to 30

  • dondforum.com
  • dooneybourke.info
  • www.evalongoriaforum.com
  • falloutboyforum.com
  • www.fergieclub.com
  • www.gofaithhill.com
  • greysanatomyclub.com
  • www.gucciweb.com
  • www.halleberryforum.com
  • hi5-friend.com
Domains 21 to 30 cleaned up across all wikipedias. --A. B. (talk) 18:56, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

31 to 40

  • howardallanstern.com
  • www.inthedb.com
  • jasminetrias.org
  • jeanreesewitherspoon.com
  • jenniferanistonforum.com
  • www.jenniferjoanneaniston.com
  • jeriryanfan.com
  • www.jessicaalbaclub.com
  • www.justintimberlakeforum.com
  • kapamilya.org
Domains 31 to 40 cleaned up across all wikipedias. --A. B. (talk) 02:59, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

41 to 50

  • kapamilyadealornodeal.net
  • kapuso.net
  • katieholmesweb.com (11 rm)
  • keithurbanforum.com (4 rm)
  • kelliepicklerforum.com
  • www.kimchiu.net
  • www.kimchiu.org
  • www.kirstendunstforum.com (12 rm)
  • www.leasalonga.net (5 rm)
  • www.mariahfansite.com (11 rm)

Top 57 clear. Femto 16:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

51 to 60

  • www.mariasharapovapicture.org (1 rm)
  • www.mariolopez.info
  • www.marthastewartfans.com (8 rm)
  • www.mauitaylor.org
  • www.maumarcelo.org
  • www.michellerodriguezforum.com (9 rm)
  • mimirogersonline.com (4 rm)
  • myangelinajolie.com (7 rm)
  • mycarrieunderwood.com (5 rm)
  • myfendi.com (4 rm)

Top 57 clear.

A note on myfendi.com: There were 3 or 4 links included by the usual socks, but the domain apparently changed owners since then. It's currently registered to the 'real' Fendi corporation and a simple redirect to fendi.com. No immediate danger, so I'm going to request de-blacklisting. Femto 15:36, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

61 to 70

  • mypanicatthedisco.com (6 rm)
  • www.myspacefansite.com (4 rm)
  • nascarfish.com (11 rm)
  • natalieportmanclub.com (14 rm)
  • ncaafansite.com (11 rm)
  • nellykimfurtado.com (9 rm)
  • neopetsfansite.com (6 rm)
  • www.nflfansite.com (10 rm)
  • nicklacheyforum.com (5 rm)
  • nicolekidmanworld.com (17 rm)

71 to 80

  • nicolerichiefan.com (10 rm)
  • oprahfansite.com (7 rm)
  • www.philippine-idol.com
  • www.philippineidol.org
  • www.pinoydreamacademy.info (1 rm)
  • www.piolopascual.org (1 rm)
  • www.pradafan.com (9 rm)
  • pussycatdollsforum.com (4 rm)
  • rihannaforum.com (4 rm)
  • www.rock-star-supernova.com (2 rm)

81 to 90

  • www.salmahayekworld.com (6 rm)
  • www.sammilby.org
  • scarlettforum.com (7 rm)
  • shakirafanforum.com (12 rm)
  • sharonstoneforum.com (15 rm)
  • www.simpsonfan.com (6 rm)
  • www.southparkclub.com (16 rm)
  • www.soyouthinkyoucandance.info (2 rm)
  • spearsfan.com (8 rm)
  • stephencolbertonline.com (3 rm)

91 to 100

  • theamazingracefan.com
  • theapprenticefan.com
  • thefacebookfan.com
  • thelostfan.com
  • themasters-tournament.com
  • thenbafan.com (rm 2)
  • tigerwoodsforum.com
  • tomcruiseforum.com
  • topmodelfan.com
  • triciahelferfansite.com
Domains 91 to 100 all cleaned up. --A. B. (talk) 01:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

101+

  • www.tylerchristopher.org
  • ufcheaven.com
  • www.vanessaminnillofan.com (1 rm)
  • www.wikipediafan.com - kinda cute though, isn't it? Femto 13:15, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • wwefanforum.com
  • youtubefan.com
  • zacefronforum.com
  • zhangziyiweb.com
  • zoesaldana.org

--A. B. (talk) 03:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Domains 101+ as well as dtwizzy.com:cleaned up --A. B. (talk) 00:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • dtwizzy.com (13 todo)

Femto 19:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

more accounts:

Femto 12:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

perhaps unrelated perhaps not:

Femto 14:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 14:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 15:22, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 15:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 15:58, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 16:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 18:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 18:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 19:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 16:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 15:57, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 19:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 16:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 15:36, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 13:09, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 18:52, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 21:01, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've cleaned up all the smaller wikipedias (those not in the top 57) for the first batch and the second batch. Lots of languages I never heard of. --A. B. (talk) 23:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank goodness there's a setting in the preferences where you can change the language of the user interface. What really makes you feel all multicultural is when you use Wikipedia in a language with a right-to-left writing system. =) Femto 16:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes -- I agree, right to left editing is hard, especially when a line combines both Western and non-Western characters.
I use the blacklisting request link as my edit summary when deleting links on other Wikipedias:
At last count, I found I now have over 160 Wikipedia accounts including Kalaallisut and Zamboanga Chavacano(see my list of accounts).
Thanks for the help! --A. B. (talk) 19:17, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In case anyone else is interested, I set up a crude cheat-sheet for foreign-language account set-up at User:A. B./Wikipedia account set-up using the Chinese Wikipedia and the Chinese interface as an example. You can quickly switch any Wikipedia to an English editing interface once you have an account. --A. B. (talk) 21:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't bother with more manual checks for the remainder, I'm going through some semi-automated queries.

  • So far, all domains beginning with Ne to Z are clear across all 253 wikis. Femto 13:15, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we're done, all domains should be clear across all wikis. Femto 21:01, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.sixsigmafirst.com

I suspect there are other editors too. -- Ronz  02:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These ips are all I could find. -- Ronz  15:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
He came back Sunday night at 75.66.114.217 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). --SueHay 02:09, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concern about a website

I've noticed the website [15] over-represented in some exercise-related pages, for instance hyperextension. I don't know the utility to check a website for the number of times it occurs on Wikipedia, could someone check? Is this an issue, or... not so much? Anchoress 23:10, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There appear to be 103 links in various wikipedia articles. IrishGuy talk 23:12, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the quick reply. I'm not very active in spam activism, is this excessive? I know that the 8 or so links in the one article I mentioned seems excessive. Anchoress 00:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm with you – it's a site that sells its own weight training books. Maybe one link in the EL section to the site would be okay – maybe – but eight? Nope. - KrakatoaKatie 23:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Domains


Socks - used as a term of endearment

I went through the linksearch hits and the above "socks" added every single one of the exrx.net external links. Arcadian has added the majority of links. Other than a few of the IP's, I would say that all the link additions were legitimate. There is even a Template:Exrx but it isn't used much. Some of the links could be cleaned up a bit such as the articles with 8 links and the video advertisements but in my opinion this isn't a spamming. (Requestion 04:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

http://spam.savvymiss.com

Spam sock accounts

MorganC123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Bri224 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Parissimo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
75.50.102.11 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
69.108.102.224 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 07:10, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pattigustafson

Please have a look at the contributions of Pattigustafson (talk · contribs) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 148.177.1.211 (talk • contribs).

Wow. Rollback work... Femto 15:07, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
healtheconomics.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 --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Related IP 66.177.53.92 (talk · contribs) and an article Health outcomes. Femto 15:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.hotscams.com

Spam sock accounts

Putobin (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
219.74.162.89 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
116.14.124.248 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
116.14.5.113 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
116.14.5.195 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
121.6.99.205 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
121.7.253.247 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 17:14, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.sil.si.edu

Potentially good links, but spammed heavily by Lexowgrant. -- Ronz  17:27, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agency at work?

First, read this article, specifically looking for the name Micah France. Then, go to this article contribution history. Not only do we have a paid agent from Scheffey Integrated Marketing creating a Wikipedia page for a client, he's bragging about it in the press. What should be done? Seems that slapping the "reads like an advertisement" template is a little weak. --SpamWatcher 21:25, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like an issue more appropriate for the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. -- Satori Son 21:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome back User:SpamWatcher. We missed you. (Requestion 16:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

http://spam.kamasutraposes.hit.bg

Adsense pub-6774133040818589

Spam sock accounts

Tanaki (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
212.25.37.254 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
212.25.37.111 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
80.58.205.55 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
Soneko (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
217.228.248.102 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

other wiki sock accounts

Samore
Darik
--Hu12 07:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.starrepublic.org

Spam sock accounts

70.22.186.168 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
70.19.195.91 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
70.22.160.123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
74.99.189.187 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
70.19.221.81 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
70.19.230.132 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
151.204.239.5 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
70.19.221.57 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 08:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC) [reply]

http://spam.sexinfo101.com

Spam sock accounts

Tomk6 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Tomku (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
--Hu12 09:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Anyone got the energy

To plough through [16]? Most of them look outside WP:EL to me... --BozMo talk 09:44, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SEO tactics showcase

If you're interested, take a look at Celebtom (talk · contribs). Wikipedia SEO tactics right out of the book. First you make a few useful (and possibly spam-removing) edits to gain their trust. Wait a little to let the account 'age', and then you can start adding your links (alphabetically, it seems)... Femto 14:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can we do anything about external links being added under "minor edits"? I haven't really dug through the policies --BozMo talk 14:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is it me, or did I see this '"someones"fan.info' somewhere else also? --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No that's fan.com. :p I would be surprised if you didn't see them all over the place. They appear to be very popular with the automatic suggestion generators of the domain sellers. Femto 15:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
see Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/UserReports/Celebtom. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

discountingcashflow.com

I'm not sure how to report this properly or find out if it's a widespread thing, but www.discountingcashflow.com is getting inserted and reinserted by Cibergili (talk · contribs). --SueHay 15:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If there comes another link, issue a last {{subst:uw-spam4}}, and if it doesn't stop then, "help will be with you shortly" (quote courtesy of WP:GRIEF) :) After a final warning is violated, you can report users at WP:AIV to get an administrator issue a block. Femto 15:47, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Was also active here as 217.130.44.221 (talk · contribs) and/or Cibergili at it:, pt:, es:. Related links: (AdSense pub-6712167095550537)

Femto 16:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC) [reply]

http://spam.pathologyatlas.net http://spam.ischemic-heart-disease.com http://spam.in-vitro-fertilization.eu

Adsense pub-9788422032407383 9788422032407383

Spam sock accounts

86.122.151.85 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
86.124.217.56 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
86.126.66.11 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
86.126.66.172 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
82.77.169.82 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
86.124.222.131 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
K keysha (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
--Hu12 21:44, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citation Spamming of Touch Group related sites WP:COI

refrence Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2007_Archive_Jan#Citation_spam
Touch group plc
Adsense pub-4706226669145133

Touch Group sites

http://spam.touchbriefings.com http://spam.touchcardiology.com http://spam.touchrespiratorydisease.com http://spam.touchgastroenterology.com http://spam.touchdermatologicaldisease.com http://spam.touchendocrinedisease.com http://spam.touchgenitourinarydisease.com http://spam.touchinfectiousdisease.com http://spam.touchmusculoskeletaldisease.com http://spam.touchneurology.com http://spam.touchoncologicaldisease.com http://spam.touchsensorydisease.com http://spam.touchspecialpopulations.com http://spam.touchplaza.com http://spam.touchsouthand.com http://spam.touchlondon.co.uk http://spam.touchoilandgas.com http://spam.touchlocal.com http://spam.touchnewcastle.com

Spam Search
  • From User:Pgeraghty... "Phil Geraghty is the Group Online Director for Touch Group Plc.'
http://spam.howtobegreek.com personal blog
http://spam.movingabroad.net site owner phil geraghty
http://spam.philgeraghty.com personal site (redirects)
Spam sock accounts

Pgeraghty (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Mergneed (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
82.35.239.197 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 22:09, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hitachi spam

Hello old friends. I'm looking for an admin with more experience than myself at dealing with spammers. The problematic user is Robko71 (talk · contribs), spamming for Hitachi trucks. See this ANI thread. Thanks in advance for your help and advice. Pascal.Tesson 17:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spam sock accounts

Robko71 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Cleaned up most the EL's, images remain an issue.--Hu12 18:43, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.legalaliensguide.blogspot.com

Adsense pub-9747548101527796

Spam sock accounts

Guide7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
68.72.136.14 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 18:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ezinearticles.com blacklisted

I just ran across an article with a link to ezinearticles.com, and couldn't save until I removed the link. Shouldn't the links be removed before it's blacklisted? See [17]. -- Ronz  22:23, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

web2earn.com spam on Wikipedia

Sample throwaway sockpuppet accounts used on en.wikipedia for one or two spam additions:

There are dozens of such accounts on many other wikipedias, too.


Accounts used for more than one or two edits:


One IP account used across many Wikipedias:

  1. bs:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  2. ca:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  3. cy:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  4. da:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  5. de:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  6. en:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  7. eo:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  8. es:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  9. et:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  10. eu:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  11. fr:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  12. gl:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  13. he:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  14. hr:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  15. ia:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  16. id:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  17. it:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  18. kw:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  19. la:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  20. lt:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  21. mi:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  22. ms:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  23. nl:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  24. pl:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  25. roa-rup:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  26. scn:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  27. sk:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  28. sl:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  29. sr:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  30. sv:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  31. tet:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  32. tr:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  33. uk:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7
  34. vi:Special:Contributions/86.104.112.7

Italian checkuser case:

Latin wikipedia discussion:


Spam domains:

Reference:

Many thanks to Latin Wikipedia spamfighters (la:Usor:UV, la:Usor:Rolandus and la:Usor:Andrew Dalby) for flagging another big one.
--A. B. (talk) 04:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

COIbot: user Wishpot

One for the COIbot Wishpot (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). Nposs 13:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Physical-therapy article spammers (resolved)

I got rid of today's crop, but there remains
* sportsinjuryclinic.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
* physioroom.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 probably others, first time I've looked at this subject matter, will keep an eye open. --CliffC 16:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I received a complaint from one of these individuals on my user page, then a few hours later another user removed it. I sent a response to both. I'm requesting that an administrator take a look at the complaint and my response, both at User_talk:CliffC#Message from User:Navigator1972, and consider deleting these links using the Magic Button. This diff shows an edit where he added his usual link along with some words of (apparent} value, but at the same time deleted a BBC link with a nice diagram and treatment advice. Thanks. --CliffC 03:59, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sigh - more spam

Michito (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

all typical minimal content, maximum Google ads pages.. *yawn* --Versageek 20:36, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does this read as an advertisment

Article: Gilman, IL Rail Transport section. --Marcusmax 23:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is simply an inappropriate level of detail for an encyclopedia article (because Wikipedia is not a directory). That same user added similar content to numerous articles. Look at the history for Albany, Oregon, for example, to see how a similar entry was edited down. Katr67 23:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

nycdermatologist.com / nycdermatologist.info

These guys are clearly spammers, they use misleading edit summaries and overwrite existing links rather than adding new ones. I first encountered them on June 3rd. The IP below was active tonight.. the userIDs are from the 3rd.

Spamsocks:

--Versageek 03:07, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Praise Twice, www.praisetwice.com

Creating pages very fast for every song by this Christian band with invitations to check out their site. nadav (talk) 04:41, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fangraphs and the Baseball Project

First, I apologize if this should be done through some template. I don't see anything about that on the head of this page, so if i've missed something please let me know. Second, I am again sorry if this is not the best place to mention this, but I am trying to breath some fresh blood into the discussion so that it a) calms down and b) is more reflective of the community as a whole rather than a few small groups of people. Okay, onto the meat of my post. For many days now, a pretty heated debate has broken out at the wiki basebal project. As you will see, the initial post was directed more at me personally than it was about the substance. What followed was a mind boggling flow of events that still seams out of control (yes i was banned as a result of a 3RR violation that stemmed from this).

In any event, I am very concerned about the inclusion of this fangraphs site into the mainstream without some "qualifications". The site at best offers a limited piece of new information and its main benefit seems that it offers the information in a different display. Furthermore, some of the unique information is so "in depth", that I feel the benefits will be limited for those who are not baseball fans. Lastly, it includes much of the information already provided in links to baseball-reference (which has a template), and several other sites. If fangraphs is to be incorporated into the "generally" accepted links, it would make sense to consider removing one of the other sites. Although I don't think FG should be included anyway, if any of the unique information is noteworthy, it could be incorporated into the given article.

Last but not least, After reviewing the different pages where it was linked [18], it appeared that it was added by a small group of people who have obviously supported its inclusion during the course of the discussion. I don't see the discussion as leading to a consensus at this point. That being said, the group of people seem to agree that there is a consensus. I'm certainly willing to discuss the back information and such behind this on my talk page. Be well //Tecmobowl 09:35, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is my first foray into the discussion regarding these sites. Because of the nature of the discussion at the WP:WPBB's Players Task Force talk page, and because of a previous content dispute with Tecmobowl, I held my tongue until now.
While I have little opinion about baseballlibrary.com, I I feel that the fangraphs.com by all means is a useful resource. In my opinion, Fangraphs is useful for several specific purposes:
  1. It allows for the direct, head-to-head graphical comparison of different players' production on a seasonal or career basis.
  2. The site provides for easily sortable historical statistics, something that Baseball-Reference does not do at all.
  3. The site uses several index statistics commonly used in the practice of sabermetrics which are unavailable at mlb.com or Baseball-Reference.
If Fangraphs is being used in these contexts, then there's no reason not to use it as a reference, especially to source specific statistical assertions – Example: Not only was Vladimir Guerrero the best power hitter on the 2002 Expos, he was also the team's biggest threat to steal bases [19] (hypothetical example, not culled from a specific article). However, if it is just being used as another source for Norm Sherry's lifetime stats, then it's no better (or worse) than the other sites mentioned here. Caknuck 18:07, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First, I'm dismayed by Tecmo's fragmenting this conversation yet again. It is already in discussion at [20]. It is already confusing for many readers to follow, given the number of comments and number of people commenting. As I have mentioned to Tecmo before, fragmenting the conversation only reduces its quality. Ignoring that, Tecmo opened up conversation afresh here. And then went on to open it up at a third location -- [21]. As Holderca1 said, at [22], "Seriously folks, I don't get it, for example, in one breath Tecmo complains that the conversation is split up over multiple locations, then he procedes to make a new section and starts discussing there. That is just one example of the insanity that has occurred."
Second, Tecmo raises the issue of his having committed one 3RR violation. At this point he has been blocked for three 3RR violations this month, and has been declared a sockpuppet after an investigation (that he and Miss M railed against heavily). This is also disrupting our ability to discuss content.
Third, Tecmo asserts "The site at best offers a limited piece of new information and its main benefit seems that it offers the information in a different display." That is false. Fangraphs, uniquely, has hitters' 1B, BB%, K%, BB/K, ISO, BABIP, RC, RC/27, GB/FB, GB%, FB%, IFFB%, HR/FB, IFH%, BUH%, GB, FB, LD, IFFB, Balls, Strikes, Pitches, IFH, BU, BUH, WPA, -WPA, +WPA, BRAA, REW, pLI, phLI, PH, WPA.LI, and Clutch. Also uniquely, Fangraphs supplies the following for pitchers: BS, K/9, HR/9, BABIP, LOB%, FIP, GB/FB, LD%, GB%, FB%, IFFB%, HR/FB, IFH%, BUH%, GB, FB, LD, IFFB, Balls, Strikes, RS, IFH, BU, and BUH, WPA, -WPA, +WPA, BRAA, REW, pLI, in LI, gmLI, exLI, and Pulls. It also has sorts for starters vs. relievers. Fangraphs also provides some spring training stats, and Bill James, CHONE, Marcel, and ZIPS projections. It has a game log, play log, compare players feature, news articles, and unique graphical presentations.
Fourth, Tecmo states: "some of the unique information is so "in depth", that I feel the benefits will be limited for those who are not baseball fans." Well, this is an article about a baseball player. Baseball fans, if they are to find such articles useful, will be interested in such statistics. This is just a short, less than one line addition. It takes up barely more room than it takes to say the month and day that a player was born -- and packs in far more information that may be useful to the reader.
Fifth, he suggest that "If fangraphs is to be incorporated into the "generally" accepted links, it would make sense to consider removing one of the other sites." I disagree. For the reasons discussed on the above-linked page, in my discussions of each site.
Sixth, Caknuck's analysis is limited to comparing a player to his team. I agree it might be useful there. But while that is how he may use it, I may use it to explore whether Ichiro slows down in his BUHs as he ages. But another reader may use it to explore Giambi's dominance in FB% over the years. And yet another may focus on the trend in Abreu's BB/K ration as he comes to the AL. For someone interested in those things, it is in fact a better source that the other three urls. They don't provide that information. And if someone is interested in college stats, baseball cube is a better source. And so on. We can't begin to predict which of these stats the readers might want to peruse -- for they may be stats that in fact show that nothing unusual happened, where the reader thinks something might have, and these are far too voluminous to include in the article, as Wiki guidelines recognize when they specifically point to this as appropriate fodder for an EL. So I guess while I appreciate Caknuck's analysis of the usefullness of fangraphs, he loses me with his closing analysis. Wiki guidelines clearly state that we "should" link sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to amount of detail, "such as professional athlete statistics." In addition, sites "with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article." Other considerations are whether the url is useful, informative, and factual. I believe that all meet these criteria. Were any completely redundant, I would be in favor of its exclusion. That is not the case. And I believe that a strong case has been made (as a first step) for the inclusion of these 4 urls, and that the vast majority of the editors who have expressed opinions have been in favor of their inclusion. I would hope that people will work towards agreement, and from there I hope that we will move forward. --Epeefleche 03:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I saw this on the MedCabal page, and I'm soliciting opinions at this point about the fangraphs site regarding the site being a commercial site that has advertising and the question would be In what way does the value to wikipedia of using the site outweigh the policy that Wikipedia is not to be used for commercial purposes? By linking to the site we would certainly be allowing wikipedia to be used to promote traffic to a site that makes money on Pay per click advertising. see WP:LINKSPAM ... Any opinions regarding the above bold text? User:Pedant 23:50, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://fanfiction.net

Special:Linksearch/*.fanfiction.net (181 links). Nothing should link here, both a blatant WP:EL violation and probably a strong indicator of userspace vanity pages that need nuking. A link report to sort by namespace would be a good idea. MER-C 10:51, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*.boardgamegeek.com

I noticed this as an irrelevant See Also link on Board games (rvt), and piqued, linksearched it. It is linked in over 800 articles and on most of its pages it has ebay adverts, forums and potential copyright image violations. Not only is it linkspammy, but wikilink spammy too.

Most of these lead to {{Bgg title}} - a template much like the one for Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#mobygames.com up there. Is this a new trend or something? JoeSmack Talk 13:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.callrecordingcenter.com/

I just ran across this and probably won't have time to follow up for a day or two. -- Ronz  17:15, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help! -- Ronz  15:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PHP-Nuke

I'm interested a second opinion on agressive link defending on PHP-Nuke. Quote: Since Wiki is free for everyone guess what? Even if you keep deleting those links they are going to be back again.[23] I've also removed advertising on the talk page.[24] My firm opinion is that the official website and dmoz are sufficient, and that renaming the section as "resources" is even more problematic (I think all of the links can go in that case, as Wikipedia does not give advice, etc.) ✤ JonHarder talk 18:30, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As i said before and i am saying it again. I do not know why you guys don't get it. This is not SPAM or internet marketing. It's not going to help me to get better PR either. But if you have a phpnuke resource listing as a phpnuke script developers for more than 2 years or so i/we deserve to be in that list. If you have a phpnuke page in wikipedia.org, you do not need to give 3/4 links to phpnuke.org site by itself or show people where else phpnuke.org is listed (BTY phpnuke.org is PR8 so of course it will be listed many places including dmoz, yahoo & places like wiki).
My final saying is that i understand you guys are doing a good job by keeping wiki spam free but information that is ralated to the topic must have it's place in the same page. YOU EITHER REMOVE THE COMPLETE "External links" SECTION OR ALLOW PHP-NUKE RELATED, DEDICATED SITES THERE.
PHPNuke-Downloads.com 04:29, 11 June 2007 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astalavistabd (talk • contribs)
Oh my! Such capital letters! First, let me first redirect you to our conflict of interest guidelines - if you are affiliated in any way with PHPNuke-Downloads.com (and I'm guessing you are), then you shouldn't be adding the link anywhere in the article. Secondly, you should also look at our policy called the three-revert rule - you are dangerously close to getting blocked for adding the link three times in 24 hours after it has been removed. This may be a wiki anyone can edit but there are consequences to those edits just like everything else in life. Lastly, this is a community based on consensus, and therefor you do not 'have the final say on what must or must not have its place on a page'. JoeSmack Talk 05:03, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Listen, I used those capital letter just to take you attention, of course i am not yelling at you. Do not try to show me rules and regulations. I only listen to rules from my company's lawyers. I just said you guys have two choices, either add php-nuke resources to the right place or remover the complete resource section. If i don't add them someone else will add them there (as you saw before). So, it's better to take a decision now.
You don't even know if i am affiliate with any of those sites. So, how did you know i tried to SPAM or do internet marketing at wiki? You just guessed, right? Thats all you guys do. Just guess (lets be real, can't i use more than one IP? you guys really make me laugh). Live a life and get a paid job, will ya? I gave up. Do whatever you guys feel like doing (because thats what you do, even if someone discuses about it, you guys feel like removing it. I am pretty sure this discussion will not stay here more than a month). I have better things to do. I said what i had to say regarding this issue. By the way JonHarder/Numan-au, for your concern (you said i don't discuss it, i just add the links) i already discussed about this issue before in the PHP-Nuke "discussion" section but someone deleted it. So, talking here is totally worthless. Beside if you look at Alexa ranking, all phpnuke related websites including phpnuke.org's ranking or traffic is going down. PHP-Nuke CMS is going down basically. I better move on when i still have time. Because i don't do social work like you guys.
Now block my IP or delete me whatever you want. I do not use Wiki anyway. As long as Google is out there getting information will not be hard at all. Of course i will not recommend Wikipedia to anyone because now i know what type of people are editing these (who does not even have a clue of PHP-Nuke CMS and who does not have clear idea of what actual SPAM is). No offense Jimmy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astalavistabd (talk • contribs)
Firstly, those aren't the only two choices in this situation. My decision is not the ultimate one that guides what happens either. Secondly, I 'guessed' that you were affiliated because, low and behold, you singed your last post "PHPNuke-Downloads.com". A quick googling confirms this as well. Lastly, please assume good faith and refrain from using insults. JoeSmack Talk 02:35, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

bearplanet.org and ipaddresslocation.org spam on Wikipedia

Major cross-wiki spam.


Google Adsense ID: 7304917892182792

http://www.proxyblind.org

http://www.proxyserverprivacy.com

http://www.ipaddresslocation.org

http://www.bearplanet.org

Users:

  1. 82.75.24.195 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • x-wiki • noticeboards || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • Google)
  2. 82.75.25.207 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • x-wiki • noticeboards || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • Google)
  3. 82.75.56.249 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • x-wiki • noticeboards || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • Google)
  4. 82.75.57.220 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • x-wiki • noticeboards || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • Google)
  5. 82.75.59.105 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • x-wiki • noticeboards || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • Google)
  6. Graciella (talk • contribs • links • count • noticeboards • user logs • user page logs • x-wiki • status)

Spam:

  1. Afrikaans Wikipedia:
  2. Alemannic Wikipedia:
  3. Albanian Wikipedia:
  4. Bosnian Wikipedia:
  5. Bulgarian Wikipedia:
  6. Catalan Wikipedia:
  7. Chinese Wikipedia:
  8. Croatian Wikipedia:
  9. Czech Wikipedia:
  10. Danish Wikipedia:
  11. Dutch Wikipedia:
  12. English Wikipedia:
  13. Esperanto Wikipedia:
  14. Estonian Wikipedia:
  15. Finnish Wikipedia:
  16. French Wikipedia:
  17. Galician Wikipedia:
  18. German Wikipedia:
  19. Hebrew Wikipedia:
  20. Hungarian Wikipedia:
  21. Ido Wikipedia:
  22. Indonesian Wikipedia:
  23. Italian Wikipedia:
  24. Japanese Wikipedia:
  25. Korean Wikipedia:
  26. Latin Wikipedia:
  27. Limburgian Wikipedia:
  28. Malay Wikipedia:
  29. Norwegian Wikipedia:
  30. Norwegian (Nynorsk) Wikipedia:
  31. Polish Wikipedia:
  32. Portuguese Wikipedia:
  33. Romanian Wikipedia:
  34. Russian Wikipedia:
  35. Serbian Wikipedia:
  36. Sicilain Wikipedia:
  37. Simple English Wikipedia:
  38. Slovak Wikipedia:
  39. Slovenian Wikipedia:
  40. Spanish Wikipedia:
  41. Sundanese Wikipedia:
  42. Swahili Wikipedia:
  43. Swedish Wikipedia:
  44. Tamil Wikipedia:
  45. Thai Wikipedia:
  46. Turkish Wikipedia:
  47. Ukrainian Wikipedia:
  48. Vietnamese Wikipedia:

--A. B. (talk) 06:24, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spam warnings:
  1. spam warning - Afrikaans
  2. spam warning - Czech
  3. spam warning - Czech
  4. spam warning - English
  5. spam warning - English
  6. spam warning - English
  7. spam warning - Portuguese
  8. Spam warning - Spanish
--A. B. (talk) 14:28, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Additional account missed earlier:
--A. B. (talk) 16:55, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Normally spam so extensive, so cross-wiki and so persistent would result in immediate Wikimedia-wide blacklisting. However, Graciella has acknowledged our warnings and apologized. In light of this and the fact that she's contributed more here than just spam, I have suggested that we might not blacklist her sites if she removes them immediately from all Wikipedias. That was an hour ago and I see that they are being removed. (Cross-wiki contribution report: note 11 June entries).
I think it's still a good idea to load these domains into the local en.wikipedia bots for monitoring.--A. B. (talk) 14:45, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have deleted all links from wikipedia (including many links that has been added by other editors).
In some situation i was not able to delete them all because of user page [25] [26], discussion [27] or semi-protected page Medvedi
In some situation there are reference [28] that has been added by other editors [29] because of reliable source.
There was not intent to spam from my side but intent to provide useful informations with unique reliable source. My apologize if it was consider as spamming and it will not happen again. Thanks — Graciella 15:01, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I left a more detailed note on your talk page, Graciella. You may encounter some Catch-22 situations such as reversions by anti-vandalism bots, etc. Just leave a note here and we'll take care of it; don't get in an edit war with a anti-vandalism bot. Likewise semi-protected articles (I fixed the Medvedi link). Don't worry about user or talk pages. You can use the cross-wiki search tool to double check that all your links are removed (and have stayed removed) on the 57 biggest Wikipedia; beyond them, you'll have to check manually. Thanks, --A. B. (talk) 15:40, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cyber Futuristics spam and disruptive behaviour on Wikipedia

Accounts:


Persistently spammed domains:


Other Cyber Futuristics sites:

Client sites and other:

Adsense IDs

  • 3437691030847276
  • 4739531695554743
  • 4739531695554743
  • 5246565896881681
  • 9719178447830247


Cyber Futuristics India Private Limited
D-61, Shiv Heera Path, C-Scheme,
Jaipur-302001
Ph: 91-141-2366498/2368166/2363604
Fax:91-141-2363604
--A. B. (talk) 13:35, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invisible inkspam

Just for information, another case ([30] for www.6-6-06.net) of "invisible inkspam". Femto 15:01, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.culturebully.com

Yet another 'interview with Joe Rockstar' site. KrakatoaKatie 00:36, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Link search tool

Hey all, I'd like to announce the availability of a new tool that can do a search for virtually any link that's been added to Wikipedia. The archives currently only extend to yesterday afternoon (when I activated the logging), but it's still, in my opinion, a very useful tool nevertheless. You can access the linksearcher at my toolserver account. Shadow1 (talk) 14:00, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have made the searchtool available from the {{spamlink}} as 'LinkWatcher search'. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Circumventing linksearches with TinyURL

This topic may have been covered here before, but has anyone run into spammers who circumvent blacklistings by adding tinyurl links? I notice that most tinyurl links in en:wikipedia are in the userspace, but I'm wondering if there is any legit reason to even allow them here, as they're more intended for email services that may break long links. Thoughts? OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:37, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

tinyurl is already on the spam blacklist. --Aude (talk) 21:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weird...after I posted this, I checked and saw that, though the it seemed like the spammer was able to post a tinyurl link. Now they're trying to use xrl.us, which is also on the blacklist. Shouldn't the software prevent them from adding [31],[32] those links? OhNoitsJamie Talk 01:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's odd. I suggest asking at m:Talk:Spam_blacklist#Troubleshooting_and_problems. --Aude (talk) 02:15, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please help at Columbia, South Carolina

Since I'm not on here as much as I'd like, it would be helpful if others would review the actions of 71.75.17.250 and 71.75.20.253, (obviously the same person) on Columbia, South Carolina, and again, the same person 24.172.118.10 on my talk page. Thanks. Pollinator 01:01, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I really need your help cleaning up a gazillion links

As a matter of policy, domains such as tinyurl.com are routinely blacklisted since they not only can be used innocently as URL shorteners but also as a means of bypassing our spam blacklist. In the majority of cases, these additions are not spam -- just innocent (if often low-quality) links. Mindless blacklisting before link cleanup will create chaos across hundreds of gridlocked articles so the links need to be cleaned up before blacklisting. Mindless link deletion in turn will delete many useful links and references since most probably were added in good faith by editors using these domains for short URLs, not blacklist bypassing. The right thing to do in most cases is to find and substitute the actual site link for the redirect URL -- that or disable the link but leave it in place where readers but not our software can see it. (If I see obviously spammy or useless links, I still delete them.)

I've been working away on "co.nr" for several weeks and have most of the other 250 Wikipedias cleaned up (except in user space). However, they're being added to the mother load, en.wikipedia, at about the same rate as I've been deleting them from the others. See:

There are presently 729 of these links in the English Wikipedia. About 450 are on articles or article talk pages, 183 on user pages, 45 on user talk pages and 51 on "Wikipedia:" pages.

I have put all this stuff on a user subpage: *User:A. B./Link cleanup

Use Femto's much better page at User:Femto/Link cleanup
--A. B. (talk) 19:29, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can I get some help to clean these up? Then we can blacklist co.nr and be done with it. Please indicate when you finish a group of pages.

Rather than messing with links on user and user talk pages, I leave a short note explaining the situation and letting them decide what to do with the link. As I noted above, in most cases, they can go to the co.nr page then find the "real" URL with a little ingenuity.

I'll finish the foreign Wikipedias, then also work on these.

Thanks, --A. B. (talk) 17:50, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto just did a great job putting together a link cleanup page similar to mine but with the domains to replace the co.nr domains with; see:
--A. B. (talk) 19:29, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personal weblinks on user pages

The other day I found this userpage with two personal websites listed, I also found out that recently this user has been using an ip to add spam to articles. I know this becuase somewhere along the line he has admited to this, you can check his contribs as he mentions this on an article talk page somewhere. So my main question is, would I be justified by removing the spam on his userpage and then warning him or would one of you guys want to remove it instead. Here is the ip talk page link User talk:121.247.150.130

--AdamJWC 06:24, 14 June 2007 (UTC) [reply]

http://spam.picturesofcats.ca http://spam.buysunglasses.ca

Adsense pub-2446130807925396

Spam sock accounts

Rickyray (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
--Hu12 08:27, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--Dirk Beetstra T C 09:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wainscoting.info on Wikipedia

Domains:

Users on en.wikipedia:

  1. 85.117.57.158 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  2. Mulekukushe (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • count • COIBot • noticeboards • user page logs • x-wiki • status • LinkWatcher search • Google)
  3. Cris newman (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • count • COIBot • noticeboards • user page logs • x-wiki • status • newman LinkWatcher search • Google)
  4. Nineliko (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • count • COIBot • noticeboards • user page logs • x-wiki • status • LinkWatcher search • Google)
  5. Spanishhello (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • count • COIBot • noticeboards • user page logs • x-wiki • status • LinkWatcher search • Google)

Cross-wiki spam:

  1. cbk-zam:Special:Contributions/Babale
  2. en:Special:Contributions/85.117.57.158
  3. en:Special:Contributions/Cris newman
  4. en:Special:Contributions/Mulekukushe
  5. en:Special:Contributions/Nineliko
  6. wikt:en:Special:Contributions/85.117.57.143
  7. wikt:en:Special:Contributions/Mulekukushe
  8. ka:Special:Contributions/Newdoro
  9. ru-sib:Special:Contributions/Babale
  10. ru:Special:Contributions/Romarido
  11. vi:Special:Contributions/85.117.57.143
  12. vi:Special:Contributions/Babale

Request to blacklist wainscoting.info on Wikipedia and Wikimedia Foundation projects:

--A. B. (talk) 15:59, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.rightreasontech.com

Videmus Omnia 18:33, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spam sock accounts

71.245.63.110 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
Videmus Omnia 00:22, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

lapiazzetta.lecce.it spam on Wikipedia

Bed and breakfast spamming cross-wiki:

Users:

A sampling:

Reference:

--A. B. (talk) 18:53, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TopQuest Investment Group spam on Wikipedia

Domains:


Accounts used on this Wikipedia and elsewhere::

Accounts not used on this Wikipedia but used on others:

TopQuest Investment Group, LLC.
dba Mashup.com
33 Newport Avenue
Quincy, MA 02171
USA

Cross-wiki spam examples (just a partial list):

References:

--A. B. (talk) 00:44, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

COI citation and spam additions of http://spam.celent.com

→ See also: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Celent
 Article Celent

Spam sock accounts

Celent (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
208.255.69.34 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) Celent Inc. UU-208-255-69-32-D4
DanielNYNYC (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Abcd777 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
OTCSF (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
GenYTech (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
208.255.69.34 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
66.134.4.114 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
62.58.81.226 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:Vandal
--Hu12 03:56, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

208.255.69.32/27 = Celent Inc.
66.134.0.0/16 = Covad Communications Co. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:01, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.collaredncuffed.com

related http://spam.collaredncuffed.prophp.org
Adsense pub-8441249758206684

Spam sock accounts

Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
--Hu12 04:47, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Attila Uyanik spam on Wikipedia

Sample link additions by just one of the 10+ IPs used:

  1. af:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  2. als:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  3. an:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  4. ang:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  5. ar:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  6. ast:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  7. bg:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  8. bm:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  9. bn:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  10. br:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  11. bs:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  12. ca:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  13. ceb:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  14. co:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  15. cs:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  16. cv:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  17. cy:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  18. da:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  19. de:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  20. el:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  21. en:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  22. eo:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  23. es:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  24. et:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  25. eu:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  26. fa:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  27. fi:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  28. fiu-vro:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  29. fo:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  30. fr:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  31. frp:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  32. fur:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  33. fy:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  34. ga:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  35. gd:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  36. gl:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  37. gl:wikt:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  38. gv:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  39. haw:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  40. he:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  41. hi:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  42. hr:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  43. ht:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  44. hu:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  45. ia:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  46. id:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  47. ilo:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  48. io:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  49. is:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  50. it:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  51. ja:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  52. jbo:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  53. ka:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  54. kn:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  55. ko:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  56. ks:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  57. ku:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  58. kw:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  59. ky:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  60. la:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  61. lad:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  62. lb:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  63. li:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  64. lo:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  65. lt:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  66. lv:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  67. mi:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  68. mk:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  69. ml:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  70. mr:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  71. ms:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  72. mt:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  73. nah:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  74. nap:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  75. nds:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  76. nds-nl:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  77. ne:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  78. nl:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  79. nn:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  80. no:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  81. nrm:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  82. nv:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  83. oc:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  84. os:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  85. pdc:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  86. pl:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  87. pt:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  88. rm:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  89. ro:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  90. ru:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  91. sa:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  92. sc:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  93. scn:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  94. sco:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  95. se:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  96. sh:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  97. simple:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  98. sk:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  99. sl:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  100. sq:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  101. sr:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  102. st:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  103. sv:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  104. sw:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  105. ta:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  106. th:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  107. tk:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  108. tl:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  109. tpi:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  110. tr:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  111. tt:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  112. uk:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  113. ur:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  114. uz:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  115. vec:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  116. vi:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  117. vo:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  118. wa:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  119. war:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  120. yi:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  121. za:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  122. zh:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171
  123. zh-min-nan:Special:Contributions/85.105.87.171

Spam domains:
1. www.cana-da.com

2. www.spaingate.com

3. www.usatn.com

4. www.uk-time.com

5. www.usamn.com

6. www.turkeygate.com

7. www.usaak.com

8. www.fr-ance.com

9. www.australiagate.com

10. www.it-aly.com

11. www.hour.ws

12. www.greenlandtravel.com

13. www.GermanyGate.com

14. www.Bookistanbul.com

15. www.J-apan.com

16. www.Egypt-Ian.com

17. www.CafeDeyIm.com

18. www.minibus.ws

Affiliated domains with the same whois point of contact:
19. http://www.cennet.ws

20. http://www.Oluyor.com

21. http://www.IstanbulGate.com

22. http://www.EnglandGate.com

23. http://www.Okul.ws

22. http://www.otokiralama.de

23. http://www.Otel.ws

Domains above show "Attila Uyanik" as the point of contact in Whois records.

Adsense ID: 1757719950149040

IP addresses used to spam this Wikipedia plus others

  1. User:A. B./IPwhois
  2. User:A. B./IPwhois
  3. User:A. B./IPwhois

Additional IP addresses used to spam other Wikipedias

  1. User:A. B./IPwhois
  2. User:A. B./IPwhois
  3. User:A. B./IPwhois
  4. User:A. B./IPwhois
  5. User:A. B./IPwhois
  6. User:A. B./IPwhois
  7. User:A. B./IPwhois
  8. User:A. B./IPwhois

References:

  1. meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#greenlandtravel.com (Permanent link)
  2. meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#it-aly.com + others (Permanent link)
  3. meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#hour.ws (Permanent link)
  4. meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#More Attila Uyanik spam (Permanent link)
  5. meta:Spam blacklist/Log#June

Complaints on other Wikipedias:

  1. bn:ব্যবহারকারী আলাপ:85.105.87.171
  2. sk:Diskusia s redaktorom:85.105.87.171
  3. lt:Naudotojo aptarimas:85.105.87.171
  4. cs:Wikipedista diskuse:85.105.87.171
  5. la:Disputatio Usoris:85.105.87.171
  6. vec:Discussion utente:85.105.87.171
  7. ro:Discuţie Utilizator:85.105.87.171
  8. pt:Usuário Discussão:85.105.87.171
  9. id:Pembicaraan Pengguna:85.105.87.171
  10. nl:Overleg gebruiker:85.105.87.171
  11. eu:Lankide eztabaida:Kabri#Spam-a

--A. B. (talk) 00:17, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

spam.ethanol-news.de

Adsense pub-3804685868542572

Spam sock accounts

Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
--Hu12 19:33, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance of a range block on these?--Hu12 08:42, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
add Template:IPvandal Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 05:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.rubayath.com

I'm not sure what to do with these editors. Rubayath has now twice created an article to promote himself, as well as make other inappropriate edits for self-promotion such as redirects across multiple pages. 64.93.46.162 has added hidden content to articles, including urls. Suggestions? -- Ronz  02:28, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

64.93.46.160/27 is "QD HEALTH CARE GROUP", Greenwich, CT, US. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:55, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
QD Healthcare is a client of Rubayath. And Rubayath works for a company in Greenwich. --Ronz 01:34, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
User:Rubayath included the invisible text "qd healthcare" in his user page at one point. [33] --Ronz 01:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

anus.com & user:sodomator

Don't have time to follow this trail at the moment, so referring here. Not sure the content is inappropriate, but even less sure that the massive link additions ( Special:Contributions/Sodomator ) are a good idea. Linksearch: *.anus.com Thanks.. ∴ here…♠ 18:44, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

spam reverted. User blocked for 24 hours. He has had many warnings and simply waits a couple of weeks and starts doing it again. If he returns to spam more, a longer block will be issued. IrishGuy talk 19:56, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I still see 79 links in the linksearch.. is the reversion in progress? Thanks. ∴ here…♠ 21:39, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See also, American_Nihilist_Underground_Society, I suppose some of these are legit. However, many of the music links are trivial and not appropriate for external links sections. ∴ here…♠ 16:30, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.homerecordingmethods.com

Adsense pub-3373805341932032

accounts

Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
--Hu12 08:58, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.uk-mortgage-protection.com http://spam.serrechevalier.org

Adsense pub-0860385821450132

Spam sock accounts

Template:Vandal
Template:Vandal
--Hu12 10:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One of the domains looked familiar and so I started digging. It turns out that uk-mortgage-protection.com is not related to the spam domain I'd warned before, but in the course of checking, I found the following:
Links added to Wikipedia by Ricklomas:
Affiliated domains (not known to have been added to Wikipedia):


French Wikipedia:


More about site owners and/or writers and the sites:
Additional Adsense ID: 9303925316102409


Two final comments:
  • Ricklomas has only been warned once. Hopefully he'll get the message.
  • I'm not sure Nightmaremode's link additions were spamming or connected to Ricklomas; his other edits don't look like Ricklomas' and he added a second, unrelated Serre Chevalier link (skiserrechevalier.eu) at the same time he added the serrechevalier.org link.
--A. B. (talk) 14:34, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.squidoo.com

Adsense pub-9879162776784828

Spam sock accounts

Template:Vandal
Template:Vandal
Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:Vandal
Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:Vandal
Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:Vandal
Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:Vandal
Template:Vandal
Template:Vandal
Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:Vandal
Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:Vandal
Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
--Hu12 10:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whee .. seconds after blacklisting/monitorlisting: Template:IPvandal. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
squidoo.com is sort of like some blogging sites, individual users are given subdirectories (er.. lenses in squidoo-speak) from which they may reap Adsense profits. --Versageek 11:51, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This sub domain has now magically disapeared --T-rex 13:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

5min.com Linkspam

I've come across the following.

There is also a WP article 5min marked for speedy deletion. I will remove the links shortly (after lunch) -- Rehnn83 Talk 11:30, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spam sock accounts
Template:Vandal
Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
MER-C 11:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added sock account, also has blog.5min.com --Hu12 23:23, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spam by RobertJRubel?

User:RobertJRubel is adding cites to publications he appears to have authored. I'm not sure if this is spam or just COI. Could someone look at this? Special:Contributions/RobertJRubel Thanks. Kablammo 02:47, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the verdict is spam. Now reverted. Kablammo 02:52, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COI citation spamming of http://nsrc.sfsu.edu

→ See also: Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#National_Sexuality_Resource_Center

related links
Spam sock accounts

Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
--Hu12 04:27, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.DieselLife.com

Spam sock accounts

Template:Vandal
Template:Vandal
--Hu12 05:30, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.freeware101.com

Adsense pub-1179145425400380

Spam sock accounts

Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
--Hu12 06:12, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spamming of http://spam.firepig.com

Adsense pub-4937991391225334

Spam sock accounts

Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
--Hu12 07:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.mikesmoves.com

Adsense pub-8705581354098370

Spam sock accounts

Template:Vandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
--Hu12 08:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Stone spam

A bunch of IPs in the 122.164.x.x range appear to be promoting articles and a website by Andrew Stone.

From Squidoo (squidoo.com is already on COIbot I believe)

And from garticles (the template doesn't seem to work with these)

  • goarticles.com/cgi-bin/showa.cgi?C=491744
  • goarticles.com/cgi-bin/showa.cgi?C=491759
  • goarticles.com/cgi-bin/showa.cgi?C=491755
  • goarticles.com/cgi-bin/showa.cgi?C=491764

IPs found so far (all edits on all accounts except one are to do with these links...):

Would be great to get the IP range and and websites on COIBot's list. Will request blacklisting on meta.

It seems like squidoo and goarticles are generally unsuitable sites for en:Wikipedia, though they may be appropriate in other projects. We're seeing more and more of this (or our standards are raising and it's becoming a more noticeable of a problem). Is it worth considering a local blacklist in addition to meta (and does mediawiki support that)? -- SiobhanHansa 13:58, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As COIBot only watches the domains, some monitoring and blacklisting of these has been added:
Monitoring will reveal all use, the blacklisting will reveal the use by these IPs. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:21, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! SiobhanHansa 14:52, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.javawhat.com

Looks mostly like a single person using a dynamic ip. Looks like others have noticed but not brought it up here. --Ronz 21:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nazca Plains Corporation Spamming

http://spam.powerexchangebooks.com http://spam.powerexchangemagazine.com http://spam.goodboner.com http://spam.thenazcaplainscorp.com

Spam sock accounts

Template:Vandal
Template:Vandal
--Hu12 09:06, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.rkstech.co.uk/ etc

I've given warnings to both user talk pages, but haven't finished cleaning up the links, so there may be more ips. --Ronz 16:14, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup complete. No further ips found in the process. --Ronz 03:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

mobygames.com

There are 6490 mobygames.com external links and most of them use the Template:Moby game. There has been a lot of discussion about the MobyGames template and the links are still being added at a rapid pace. Removal of some of the links caused an edit war. The template's usage is semi-sanctioned by WP:VG but it seems to violate WP:EL and WP:NOT. The spam coefficient is extremely high here. Read the threads for extensive details.


Domains


Socks - term used in the unknown sense


WP:SPA = Single-purpose account or IP address that only added moby games links


Threads


I haven't discovered the WP:COI yet but no one manually adds 6490 templated external links for the fun of it. I have no idea how to proceed. Removing this many links is not humanly possible so bot aid might be required. I request advice and guidance. (Requestion 01:19, 5 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Actually, Template:User5 was basically acting like a bot, indiscriminately adding the template to every game (alphabetically). This is noted in some of the discussions. I don't know that you will find a COI, but many of those links ended up being to articles with less information than the WP article already contained. In some instances, it linked to the wrong game. In my opinion, all of the the TnS's edits should be reverted. It seems like the template could be added in good faith (and in some instances the articles linked could provide more relevant content.) Not sure how else to sort out the good links from the bad, but the onus for justifying linking is on the linker and most of links should probably be removed. Nposs 18:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I found the WP:COI connection. It turns out that User:Flipkin is "David Berk" who is one of the mobygames.com cofounders. I suspect that he is also several of the above socks. (Requestion 23:02, 5 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Linksearch reports that there are now 6518 mobygames.com external links. (Requestion 19:38, 15 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]
I just added User:68.46.123.33 who is an extremely interesting sock puppet of the banned user User:Pioneer-12. Here is the timeline: Pioneer-12's Comcast Cable IP address gets indefinitely blocked but somehow continues editing. Then in December 2005 roughly +300 mobygames.com external links are added in a rapid SPA fashion. Then the IP address gets warned, the spam is deleted, and then re-added after some pleading. Why are all of the mobygames.com SPA spammings fishy like this? (Requestion 00:25, 16 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Linksearch reports that there are now 6528 mobygames.com external links. This is a gain +10 links from 10 days ago or +1 link/day. (Requestion 20:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I'm going to add my 2 cents in there by saying that mobygames.com is a video game encyclopedia. Putting an External Link in encyclopedia that leads to another encyclopedia is kind of pointless. Also, most of the info on mobygames.com is very basic and odds are, the Wiki page of that game has all of that info and much more. Mobygames.com as it's own Wiki page, a lot of websites that have been online for a longer period of time still don't, so this should be enough for the moby fans. Duhman0009 02:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Soooo, whats next? TfD? JoeSmack Talk 19:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Destroy the links, what else is there? I think the only acceptable link should be about the official home page of a product. Duhman0009 20:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Should we have another go at getting the template deleted but try to take out sock votes this time? I am prepared to block the more obvious spam sock accounts before we start. --BozMo talk 09:47, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
By the way this site [34] seems to being heavily spammed by the same people. --BozMo talk 09:55, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I say go for it, can't hurt to try. Duhman0009 12:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, are you linked with http://screwattack.com at all? You seem to link to it a bit? --BozMo talk 14:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, I just felt like they should deserved links on Wiki since crap like Mobygames.com already did. Duhman0009 22:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think another TfD is a good idea but the WP:VG project will probably put up a lot of resistence. Just discovered that Special:Linksearch/*.klov.com has 811 external links and is another WP:VG sanctioned Template:KLOV game. I wonder how many more there are? (Requestion 15:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]
My Two Pence for what it's worth - I don't believe that MabyGames.com classes as Spam. The site is a well known resource/encylopedia. Howver wether these links are appropiate under WP:EL is another matter. In my Humble Opinion' where a game has its own website (all modern games) that a link to Moby Games is not appropiate. However for older games which do not have their own website - Moby Games might be the only resource covering it - in this case a link to Moby Games would be appropiate. However I also feel that this should be discussed with WikiProject:Games or WikiProject:Computer Games (or whichever WikiProject this falls in the purview of). -- Rehnn83 Talk 14:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't 6490 mobygames.com external links seem a bit excessive? Isn't the fact that the website's cofounder added several thousand links a major WP:COI problem? (Requestion 15:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]
If the majority of the links have been added by a few editors then you have a clear case of link spamming. I have not checked to see who the links have been added by. -- Rehnn83 Talk
If you check out the contribution logs of User:Corn Popper, User:Flipkin, User:TnS, and User:Ravimakkar you'll see some very dense SPA addition of about 4000 mobygames.com external/template links. (Requestion 20:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Mobygames is like the IMDB or AMG of games. KLOV does the same for coinop. Linking to them is clearly useful.
See Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Templates#External link templates, and discuss with the relevant wikiprojects before coming to any conclusions please. Thanks. --Quiddity 18:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"Useful"????????? --BozMo talk 08:31, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There have been many discussions with WP:VG about this, see the threads above. The conversation never goes well. The vast majority of the spamming has either been done by the mobygames.com founder or by one of the several throw away SPA accounts. One of the SPA's spammed for exactly one year (Jan 1 2006 - Dec 31 2006) which is very suspicious. More importantly, there is strong evidence to suggest a COI spamming by MobyGames. (Requestion 20:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Best to go by the guidelines then. MobyGames itself does not in my view meet the clearly laid out criteria for a webpage so lets see what happens when I flag it. --BozMo talk 13:41, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I had skimmed the arguments earlier, and only just today got around to actually taking a look at some of these Mobygames links. And oh my goddess I didn't realize just how bad it was. Comparing a a featured article to its Mobygames counterpart seems hardly fair. Even articles in pretty bad shape still far outpace corresponding pages on Mobygames; the only (emphasis on only) manner in which Mobygames is actually useful or reliable is its collection of professional reviews, a feat duplicated by any given editor's site of choice. Nifboy 05:06, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On what basis do you make a comparison, though? Clearly Wikipedia's Chrono Trigger article goes into more detail about gameplay, story, and development, but is lacking things like screenshots, most cover art, product codes, and complete credits. They seem quite complementary. I agree many MobyGames entries aren't in a state that deserve to be linked to, though. JoshuaJSlone 17:29, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

mobygames.com seems to be spam in the same way that IMDB is spam. Links to the site should only be added where there's some actual relevant content on the site. So if mobygames.com merely has a "placeholder" page for the game, adding a link to it would be spam. However, where mobygames.com has considerable content regarding the game, adding a link is fine, just like adding a IMDB link for, say, The Godfather is ok. --Oscarthecat 07:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So what percentage are any good? If the templates (more than one exists) are say 80% being used for inappropriate links I would argue for deletion of the template on grounds "mainly spam". Deleting the template doesn't stop links to the article of course. --BozMo talk 09:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree: if 80% are inappropriate then removing the template altogether would be appropriate. --Oscarthecat 12:13, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:COIN#MobyGames.2F_Flipkin: I strongly advocate removal of the links (in external links sections) added by the spamming accounts (see WP:SPAM: "Adding external links to an article or user page for the purpose of promoting a website or a product is not allowed, and is considered to be spam. Although the specific links may be allowed under some circumstances, repeatedly adding links will in most cases result in all of them being removed."); established editors can then readd where they think the link does significantly add to the article. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:23, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just checked with Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Moby_game and there are slightly less than 4500 links back to that template. 6500 - 4500 = 2000 direct mobygames.com links. So a TfD on the template would solve a majority of the problem but not all of it. (Requestion 19:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]
There's also Template:Tl, which has around 250 uses. GarrettTalk 22:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As a person who added +200 links to Mobygames pages and was suspected of being a sockpuppet, I want to clarify:
  1. I am not a sockpuppet nor a spam bot.
  2. I am in no way affiliated with MobyGames authors nor have I any interest in promoting the MobyGames website.
  3. I kept adding links with good faith, and on the (as I now understand, eroneous) assumption that some consensus on this topic had been reached before.
After all, I agree that deleting all MobyGames links and re-adding them if they contain "relevant information", is a good way of solving the problem. --Krótki 14:36, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Krótki. I apologize if I offended. I didn't mean to imply that you were a sock puppet. A "sock" is just a generic term we use here at WT:WPSPAM that has a lot of different meanings. I used it in the unknown sense as I sorted out who added all those moby links. (Requestion 19:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]
No, I'm not offended, no problem. Just wanted to clarify that I'm cooperative. --Krótki 10:08, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Soooo, again, are we ready for a TfD? Seems like it. JoeSmack Talk 19:56, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See this page for the previous Tfd. I don't know that a new discussion would be any different, but heck, go for it. While MobyGames has some great content, some entries are too rough to even be worth visiting let alone linking to. GarrettTalk 22:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 June 9#Template:Moby developer. MER-C 06:06, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The TfD doesn't look like it's going well. The keeps outnumber the deletes by a factor of 2 with WP:ILIKEIT as the popular rational. I see that there is a TfD message in every one of the 4500 locations where the template is being used. Is this the correct procedure? All the other TfD's I've seen didn't do this and it would explain the massive keep support. (Requestion 00:09, 13 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]
I agree that the template won't go: fine. I don't have a problem with every appearance of the template flagging possible removal: that happened with spoiler warnings at least. We still have a decision on the COI though. I think we should push for an automated removal of all links put in by the linkspam campaigners, put the hardcore criminals on final warning (bearing in mind I wouldn't support a community ban even for something this flagrant without any prior warning) and move on. --BozMo talk 08:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There were prior final warnings and even a block was issued. There were also promises that the spamming would stop. None of that worked. New socks popped up and the cycle repeated. IMO we are way past the warning stage. (Requestion 17:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#3 comments. Thank you. --Quiddity 16:59, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is bhirt, and I want to clarify a few things...

WildKard is not MobyGames staff. WildKard has an account on MobyGames and helps out with editorial on a purely volunteer basis. If that qualifies as staff, every single person with a wikipedia account is wikipedia staff, myself included. Also, a lot of wikipedia users and wikipedia editors are MobyGames games users too and participate in both projects.

Also why are you labeling my account as an SPA? I've never ever even edited a single article? Also, your list is completely misleading implying all these account are involved with MobyGames, which they are not. Flipkin, Trixter, Corn Popper (you can mark him as a co-founder if you want) and I are the only 4 people that are a part of MobyGames, and flipkin left the project a month ago. MobyGames does not have any employees or paid staff. We all have full time jobs and work on MobyGames on the side. --Bhirt 08:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree you personally are not an SPA. I also am warming to the actual site content now I've had a look but allowing or getting people to linkspam this site was totally out of order. You also need to come clean about who Ravimakkar was. --BozMo talk 08:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Look at User:Bhirt's contribution log. Bhirt is an SPA. The single/special purpose is to keep the thousands of mobygames.com links. I'm also a bit curious now, there isn't an SPA tag next to Bhirt's name above. So what does Bhirt mean by "why are you labeling my account as an SPA?" Which account? Hmmm. It really doesn't make a difference though since all the socks are treated as a single MobyGames entity. (Requestion 18:36, 13 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Sorry I caused the confusion by taking the SPA comment off. Anyway lets move on to some sort of solution. --BozMo talk 19:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It always makes me shake my head at how these spam templates can just be created but it takes an act of God to get rid of them. Moby games can merit a link sometimes, but the abusive use of this template is astonishing. Some socks and fanatics say it should be placed on EVERY game article, no matter what. (Seriously this was advocated.) If a bot added links, they should all be removed immediately Extrnal links should be added based on merit, and a bot can't decide that. personally I'd remove every Moby games link, delete the template, then start from scratch. Any link added by a human can be judged on its own merits. 2005 00:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, whoah! This is Frecklefoot and I am not a sockpuppet of a MobyGames founder, admin or anything else related to MobyGames. I did create the MobyGames templates, but only as a convenience for when I added MobyGames links to articles I've written. I add them when I think their entry has something to add to the article (like full credits and dozens of screenshots). Look at my contributions. Does it look like I exist merely to promote MobyGames? Please take me off the list! I take offense at the suggestion that I am a sockpuppet. — Frecklefoot | Talk 14:13, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Frecklefoot. I didn't mean to imply that you were a sock puppet. A "sock" is just a generic term we use here at WT:WPSPAM that has a lot of different meanings. I used it in the unknown sense as I sorted out who added all those moby links. You created the moby template and you have added a huge number of moby links, so your inclusion in the above list is required. I added the tag good faith editor next to your name above, hope that helps. I have three questions. Is my estimate that you added +900 moby links accurate? What are your thoughts on the unchecked spam / COI abuse by the MobyGames founders? Do you have a plan or a suggestion for dealing with this problem? (Requestion 19:04, 14 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Same here. I was reverting the edits because I thought it had been decided to include Moby links at the bottom of the pages in question and stopped when it was clarified that it had not. --Marty Goldberg 19:46, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Me as well. I reverted two links because I thought that policy had been decided at WPVG, and the Moby pages in question contained credits, which in my book counts as informative (however, I agree the links should be deleted where they serve no useful purpose). Before that, I added a few moby templates here and there because I didn't know there was a debate. As well, I added only one or two templates, not the hundreds that some other users have. I wish you could use a different term then "sock" here, as I also take offense at being called a sock, regardless of whether you mean sock puppet or not. Green451 01:30, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I also find this a blatant violation that this goes against the principles of AGF. Look at my contribs. Do I look like a spammer to you? Green451 02:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
One thing I forgot to mention. I am not associated with Mobygames in any way. I am not a staff member, I am not a member, and I have never contributed anything to their site. I've just browsed it occasionally and find it to be (on occasion) a useful site. Green451 16:08, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Green451. Nobody accused you of being a socket puppet or a spammer. I have added the good faith editor next to yours and Marty's name above, hope that helps. You need to understand the immense amount of work it is to dig up and uncover who was adding all the mobygames.com links. This was a huge mess. Like you said, you only added a few templates which were part of a blanket undelete done by a few members of WP:VG. Nothing to be alarmed about but your help and understanding would be greatly appreciated here. Thanks. (Requestion 17:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Okay, sure, I can live with this. While I still think that the site can be useful, COI subjects adding the links is completely unacceptable. Hope you get to the bottom of this. Green451 00:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2005: Please Please take a read through the thread Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#3 comments. I'm trying to delicately but emphatically explain my own perspective, which in short form is that a slash&burn response is a overreaction, and vastly more harmful than beneficial. However, please read the full thread, and give a response there if you feel so inclined. Much thanks. --Quiddity 18:06, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's an extremely clear case of spam and WP:COI and the links should immediately be removed and the site added to our blacklist so the spammers don't just go put it all back. DreamGuy 19:19, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

truthroom.com

Over the past two years the only activity of this handful of accounts is to add links to a non-encyclopedic, non-notable site, Template:Linksearch.

Multiple editors have removed the links but this person is persistent. This site is not helpful to quality articles and the editor chooses not to submit the link for consideration on the talk page as indicated by the various levels of warning templates. I would like an administrator to review this activity and block Murderinc for reiniserting a link the day after receiving the last warning. As an aside, is "Murderinc" an appropriate username? It could be construed as a threat. ✤ JonHarder talk 17:29, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.earthmusic.net

Adsense pub-8580982275784999

Spam sock accounts

Template:IPvandal
Template:IPvandal
--Hu12 09:06, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possible spamming

I don't know what the position of google video is here on wikipedia, but [[these contribs seem like possible spam to me, even if it is well intentioned. Cheers--Cronholm144 11:04, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have blacklisted the user against the link, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/UserReports/Rludlow. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks muchly :)--Cronholm144 14:15, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

uniadmission.com

All contribs here appear to be spam for uniadmission.com. This seemed the appropriate place for notification (please advise if incorrect) since there's too many of them for manual revert. → AA (talk • contribs) — 12:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User Psycling

User User:Psycling Psycling seems to be spamming a number of pages. There are too many for me to undo. __earth (Talk) 14:24, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of (so called) 'useful' links in this portfolio:
All monitored/blacklisted now. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Funnyordie.com

Videmus Omnia 22:51, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2007_Archive_Jun&oldid=1137364576"