Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2018 Archive Feb 1

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


Spamming for Setapp

178.137.213.131 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot) 217.20.166.117 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)

A new software subscription service with concerted efforts to spam mentions and links in as many vaguely-related articles as possible. I have cleaned up and left both IPs a COI/spam-warning. A very small percentage of their edits have been neutral and constructive. Not much to do at the moment though - just a short notification to look out for eventual future problems. GermanJoe (talk) 14:19, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

onefivenine.com

onefivenine.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

Following this discussion at WP:RSN and the suggestions here regarding where to seek filtering, I would like to request that onefivenine.com be blacklisted. There are numerous other websites mentioned in the RSN discussion that have similar problems but I don't think those responding there really addressed them, unfortunately. - Sitush (talk) 15:27, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Any thoughts on this? I am attempting to clean up over 2000 links but if they're just going to come back when other people edit then perhaps there is no point. Perhaps I am asking at the wrong venue? - Sitush (talk) 13:55, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
@Sitush:--RSN threads can only lead to a consensus on whether a source is reliable/unreliable.And, the consensus was that all were unreliable.That's not a good-venue to discuss the spammy nature of the same, which typically manifests over here and is often subject to unilateral patrolling-admin-discretion.Also, it may be borne in mind that plain unreliabilty of a source, even if vetted at RSN, cannot lead to an automatic outright blacklisting.XLinkBot is often used for the purpose and User talk:XLinkBot/RevertList is probably a better venue.~ Winged BladesGodric 16:20, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
@Beetstra:-- Any thoughts?!~ Winged BladesGodric 16:20, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm not aware of blacklisting being used in this way in the past. I'd take it to XLinkBot. --Ronz (talk) 16:41, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

@Ronz, Winged Blades of Godric, and Sitush: I agree with user:Ronz that we can step up first to XLinkBot (and I will), but we have in the past, if there is broad community consensus, blacklistd links that were just utterly unreliable. I guess that the right place to come to the consensus that Wikipedia is protected against this unreliable information through blacklisting would be at RSN, with a follow up request at the blacklist pointing to the RSN thread. Use is then by enforced vetting at the whitelist. —Dirk Beetstra T C 03:56, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

@Sitush: plus Added to User:XLinkBot/RevertList. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:56, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
@Sitush: plus Added to User:XLinkBot/RevertReferencesList. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:57, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
@Beetstra:--In that case, can you add the remaining links mentioned by Utcursch on the discussion?~ Winged BladesGodric 04:01, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
@Winged Blades of Godric and Sitush:, can you list them in LinkSummary templates in a subsection of this section? --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:42, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
Once, it's added to XLinkBot Revert-list, I will probably run AWB to clean up articles of these links.~ Winged BladesGodric 07:34, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
I am trying to clean up other issues at the same time - overlinking, lack of MOSTIES templates, Indic scripts etc. AWB might make that impossible. - Sitush (talk) 13:07, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
Many of the affected articles that use onefivenine appear to have been created by a very small number of contributors using a bot or copy/paste technique that means numerous issues have been perpetuated across all of their creations, although some have subsequently been amended. - Sitush (talk) 13:12, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
@Sitush:--Hmm...AWB isn't much helpful.Regex techniques could accurately substitute the refs with a cn tag but the articles are often so crappy, that it's hard to pass without a cleanup which negates the speed of AWB.~ Winged BladesGodric 09:11, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
@Winged Blades of Godric: plus Added to User:XLinkBot/RevertList. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:35, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
@Winged Blades of Godric: plus Added to User:XLinkBot/RevertReferencesList. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:36, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

goo.gl

Pavzi was using a [[Google URL Shortener|goo.gl] link to spam a page earlier today. I know that some google apps (maps in particular) use goo.gl links and possibly others, but I'm surprised that the domain isn't blocked as a redirect site. Any thoughts on blocking it, but whitelisting any of the useful paths? This appears to be pretty open right now. Ravensfire (talk) 03:47, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

An IP edit - [1] - both are India related articles and periodic spam. Ravensfire (talk) 05:45, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

@Ravensfire: Sigh, my 'fault'. I whitelisted https://goo.gl/#home for the official website of the article subject (Goo.gl) - but the whitelist does not accept '#' in the regex in any form, so basically I whitelisted goo.gl. I have adapted the regex (not completely happy yet, but this stops most of it). --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:04, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

(I added the track to this discussion - it is a nice example of why url-shorteners are to be blanket blacklisted, they will be abused. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:06, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


Glad it was something straightforward! Appreciate it as always, @Beetstra:. Ravensfire (talk) 13:33, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

gotocourt.com.au

links
related links
accounts

SPA user accounts adding URL (some as EL, some disguised as ref) ongoing for nearly three years. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:08, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

@Barek: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:09, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Webrand4u

Link
Spammers

+ more. Please blacklist. -KH-1 (talk) 06:52, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

@KH-1: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist - please, for these clear-cut cases, directly post them to WT:SBL, sections there get resolved quicker. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:29, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2018_Archive_Feb_1&oldid=1181803416"