Wikipedia

MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/September 2012

< MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist | archives
Latest comment: 12 years ago by A. B. in topic filipinofoodsrecipes.com

Proposed Additions

edit

techpuffs.com

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Repeatedly added as reference spam. --Biker Biker (talk) 07:19, 5 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Ashishchandradev is the name of the site's owner. Worth nothing that the user has now be permanently blocked for spamming. Suggest that the site is added to the blacklist ASAP to stop him popping up with IP edits --Biker Biker (talk) 07:43, 5 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

On his talk page, Ashishchandradev claims to be new, admits to wanting to promote his site, and promises to abide by the rules if unblocked. I think there's a better than 50% chance that he will be unblocked.
I'd say leave this case open for a while longer to see what transpires. Currently nobody else is attempting to spam this site. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:43, 7 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
The user has successfully appealed his block. Watch and wait.... :) ~Amatulić (talk) 23:10, 9 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

martinlawfirm.com

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Google Analytics ID: UA-788456 - (Track - Report - reverseinternet.com • Meta: Track - Report)

Spammers

MER-C 10:39, 7 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

  Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 22:26, 20 August 2012 (UTC)Reply


herbalcigarette.org

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:38, 25 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

  Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:02, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

hairsaloninclearwater.com

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

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

See WikiProject Spam report MER-C 10:50, 27 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Another domain later spammed:
--A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:11, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
  Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:16, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

www.bioquestmedical.com

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago12 comments6 people in discussion
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Note- Few people, would be aware of this report and respond so quickly if they were not connected or had knowledge of these accounts activities (ie. "marketing executive" -account created after the fact). Claims of "foul play" against bioquestmedical.com seems deceptive as they are contradicted by the edits, which clearly illustrate typical in house style SEO. The bigger picture clearly shows bioquestmedical.com using Wikipedia to promote their own interests.--Hu12 (talk) 17:24, 14 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Spamming from multiple single use accounts. OwainDavies (about)(talk) edited at 20:45, 30 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi this is Raj sharma marketing executive for bioquestmedical.com.I am preety naive at wikipedia and do not understand much but I would like to mention some points after I saw bioquestmedical.com in the blacklist page....
In the proposed addition column there is box guiding users the process of blacklisting a domain explaining why and how a domain should be blacklist.I would like to mention few points which is against or contrary to those guidelines
1.Guideline-"Consider informing editors whose actions are discussed here"
I am assuming that the guideline is explaining to inform the domain admin about blaclisting.
Assuming above I would like to state that I was never informed about such activity.
It was only through our marketing team I came to know about the blacklisting.
2.Guideline-"Have links been placed after warnings/blocks?"
There have been no warning/blocks or message provided by anyone.
As stated I am naive at wikipedia, I would just request our fellow members to kindly remove this link as I get to know more about why the link have been blacklisted
Thankyou
Raj sharma — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajsharma1980 (talk • contribs) 11:35, 31 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
here is mysign Rajsharma1980 (talk) 11:42, 31 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
thankyou
Bioquestmedical.com is not blacklisted, yet.
Your assumption #1 is false. Wikipedia is responsible only for what happens on Wikipedia. Informing some external entity of blacklisting is not our responsibility. Rather, it is the responsibility of you and your marketing team to understand Wikipedia's policies and guidelines before participating here. It has been a well known fact for many years that Wikipedia must not be used for promotional purposes.
Warnings and blocks are not a prerequisite to blacklisting. Particularly if the problem accounts appear to be operated by the same entity and are being used solely for promotional purposes, they will likely be blocked anyway. ~Amatulić (talk) 13:27, 1 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

I spent some time In evaluating the reasons why the link is proposed for blacklisitng...and I get to know that someone have uploaded the links in between some wikipedia articles .....We sense some foul play by someone against us to damage our image.... We would try find possible ways to avoid it happening in coming time. I request the fellow members to remove the link from the list, Thank you. Rajsharma1980 (talk) 15:06, 4 September 2012 (UTC) Reply

Side discussion
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  Declined A commercial link such as this is of no use to the project, and as such there is no compelling reason to remove it from the blacklist. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:56, 4 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
Umm, unless I'm missing something, bioquestmedical.com isn't on the blacklist. This is a proposed addition, not a proposed removal. Jafeluv (talk) 06:08, 5 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
Oops, mistake on my part. OhNoitsJamie Talk 12:59, 5 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
Rajsharma1980, as has already been explained to you, your domain is not blacklisted... yet. And bear in mind that blacklisting would prevent any possibility of 'foul play' occurring in the future.
In keeping with Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, which recommends public disclosure of any close association, would you please let us know which of the accounts listed at the top of this section belong to members of your marketing team? This would help us better evaluate this case. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:31, 5 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
Hi AMatulic,
As per my consultation with the marketing members none have agreed doing this.Rajsharma1980 (talk) 13:37, 14 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

easygreenoffers.com

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

  Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:12, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

mesotheliomainformation2012.blogspot.com

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:33, 9 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

  Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:16, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

dreamboxok.com

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Spammers

MER-C 13:00, 10 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

  Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:20, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

BLP attack sites

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Used to attack the subject of our Robin De Groot article:

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:10, 10 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

  Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:26, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

customautosbytim.com

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Spammers

MER-C 04:26, 11 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

  Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:28, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

glblgeopolitics.wordpress.com

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 14:39, 11 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

  Done with some urgency as spamming was ongoing. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Spamming by adding javascripts to our articles

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion

See this discussion at WP:ANI of how an IP tried to do this: [1]

Here is the site:

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:22, 11 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

  Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:31, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
Subsequent discussion at WP:ANI indicates blacklisting may not be effective:[2]
Reviewme is not a useful site and it encourages affiliates, so I will leave it on the blacklist for now unless an established trusted editor objects. Otherwise, we can expect more spam, even if it's not from the same person.
--A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:57, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

comixdownload.com

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

See [3] and [4]. Thanks, – Connormah (talk) 23:09, 11 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Features bad-faith replacements of relevant links with spam links:
--A. B. (talk • contribs) 11:12, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
  Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:34, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

hightrafficacademy.com

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 04:08, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

  Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:37, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Eight years of Express Companies Inc (Encinitas) spam on Wikipedia

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Spam domains
Spam accounts
Domain owner
Express Companies, Inc.
565 Westlake St.
Building 100
Encinitas, California 92024
United States
Edit behaviours
  • "Spam control":[[6]]
  • Deleting others' links (including the Red Cross): [7][8][9][10][11][12][13]
    • This is just a small sample
  • Linking to magazine articles written by employees:[14][15]
  • Promoting books:[16]

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 05:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

  Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:44, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Giftbig.com

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Repeatedly added to Gift card. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:05, 14 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

  Done -- thanks for reporting. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:40, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Pushkar Royal Safari Camp spam on Wikipedia

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Domains:

Related domains:

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:00, 16 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

  Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:43, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Fox Direct Network's Wikipedia-spamming

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago18 comments1 person in discussion

Adsense google_ad_client = pub-1687575123054330 (Track - Report - reverseinternet.com • meta: Track - Report)

Anonymous IPs used:

Spammed from these IPs:

Related SEO firm:[www.globalizationautomation.com/history]

There are more domains involved; this is as far as I’ve gotten today. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:21, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

  Done, at least for the batches listed so far. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
At it again:
--A. B. (talk • contribs) 09:06, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
  Done - latest 7 domains --A. B. (talk • contribs) 09:11, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
  Done -- second batch of 20 related domains now blacklisted. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 15:47, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
  Done -- third batch of 22 related domains now blacklisted. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:55, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Note: Expect a new round of Fox Direct spam in the next 24 hours, most likely from IPs between 0000 and 0800 UTC.
--A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:58, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Two more domains spammed in the last several hours from 180.190.150.164:
--A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:52, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
Two more related domains:
--A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:00, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
  Done the latest 4 have been blacklisted. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:07, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
145 Fox Direct domains blacklisted to date. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:12, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
  Done -- fourth batch of 110 related domains now blacklisted. This brings the total to date to 255.
Note that one of the domains, lesleyjoseph.com, was spammed as the "official" site to our Lesley Joseph article several years ago by 70.180.205.89 (talk · contribs · count). The link stayed all this time even though there's nothing on the site. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 22:18, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Missed one stopped yesterday by the abuse filter:[19]

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 00:48, 18 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Also turned up still another IP:

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:51, 18 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Template:Done - 5th batch of related domains above plus the cures-for-heartburn.com domain spammed yesterday. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:05, 18 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

divereport.com

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

from www.divereport.com/advertising/:

"By nature, the vast amount of unique and topical content on Dive Report, and the linking structure within the site, by having Dive Reports linking to centre pages, and centre pages to your website, you are able to enhance you SEO efforts while marketing your brand. As each location and set of reports are highly focused on locations where you operate it provides very focused and high quality links. The more reports that link through to your centre page the more 'SEO juice' is passed from Dive Report to your website."

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Template:Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:39, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Binary Bulls Media spam on Wikipedia

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Disruptive editing and link-spamming; a small sample: [21][22][23][24][25][26][27]

Related domains:

Spammers:

Template:Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:43, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

onespot.in

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:55, 18 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Template:Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:15, 18 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

psiram.com

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Template:LinkSummary

I have seen this url for the past few days --Jim1138 (talk) 09:40, 19 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Template:Done--Hu12 (talk) 13:49, 20 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

ideabdl.com

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Template:LinkSummary

Obvious commercial spam. If it had just been one IP, I'd ignore it, but… —Template:SubSup 13:00, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Template:Done. Thanks for reporting, Kerfuffler. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:08, 25 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

filipinofoodsrecipes.com

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Template:AdSenseSummary
Template:GoogleAnalyticsSummary

Spammers

MER-C 13:01, 23 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Template:Done -- thanks for tracking all this down, MER-C. What a mess. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:09, 25 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/September_2012&oldid=1109325257"
pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy