Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/2018-11

Add topic
Active discussions

Proposed additions

  This section is for completed requests that a website be blacklisted

See User:COIBot/LinkReports/, thanks ToBeFree (talk) 19:26, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

@ToBeFree:   Declined as it is English Wikipedia specific spam. I have added the domain to enWP's revert list for XLinkBot and put it onto the monitor list. If it continues we would look to have enWP blacklist it.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:36, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Please added to global spam-blacklist.

Massive cross-wiki spamming since May 2018 (at least) on frwiki, enwiki, itwiki, trwiki, zhwiki, dewiki, ruwiki, dawiki, plwiki, ptwiki, jawiki, arwiki, eswiki, fawiki, hewiki, ukwiki, cswiki, idwiki, nowiki, svwiki, etwiki, hiwiki, siwiki, rowiki, eowiki, fiwiki, en.wikibooks, en.wikiversity and

Added by several IP's, including:

Thank you.

(sorry for my bad english)

--Tractopelle-jaune (talk) 14:49, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

@Tractopelle-jaune:   Added to Spam blacklist. -- — billinghurst sDrewth 22:42, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Can this be added: - because a yellow and blue, colorful link at the bottom of this page leads to porn.

the eloquent peasant (talk) 01:22, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

So I copied this link from an Arabic wiki a long time ago, but afterwards, much time afterwards when I returned I found the link was bad, because it has a separate link at the bottom of the page that leads to porn. I had not noticed that when I added it to the article. In fact I believe a user was banned on Arabic wiki for adding this site. If I understand the translation correctly on their page. It says "offensive words" and such "links to pornographic" .. I see that now. I don't read Arabic. I recently found the issue with and deleted it from Greater Cairo Planning Commission - a page I'd updated and I reported the site I also think that the site I meant to add as a reference was a completely different domain, associated with Urban development in Egypt and Cairo. --the eloquent peasant (talk) 21:45, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
If it is not being actively added, I do not see a purpose to blacklist it. There are tens of thousands of problematic websites that we don't blacklist.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:24, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
OKay. That makes sense. Thanks for your time.--the eloquent peasant (talk) 23:59, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  not done at this time.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:54, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

URL shortener found in spamming attempt on Commons. --Achim (talk) 14:47, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

@Achim55:   Added to Spam blacklist. -- — billinghurst sDrewth 03:36, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

URL shortener found in spamming attempt on Commons. --Achim (talk) 14:47, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

@Achim55:   Added to Spam blacklist. -- — billinghurst sDrewth 03:36, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Redirect site. Abused. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 05:26, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

@Beetstra:   Added to Spam blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 05:26, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

javad ramezani spam

  • Regex requested to be blacklisted: actor/javad-ramezani

back and active again. :-(  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:48, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

@Billinghurst:   Added to Spam blacklist. -- — billinghurst sDrewth 13:48, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

The Stadio Flaminio itself is a sports venue in Rome, Italy. The website IS NOT in any way related to the Stadium. An anonymous user today attempted to insert in the Italian article of Stadio Flaminio as the stadium's official site. In fact, as I checked, is a malicious / fraudulent site with a redirect to . It should be blacklisted from every meta project. -- Blackcat (talk) 16:09, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

@Blackcat: We don't generally blacklist globally where the request is based on a single addition by a person at one wiki; that can be managed locally if that community chooses to do so. I will get COIBot to kick out a XWiki report.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:35, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
Ok thanks, @Billinghurst:. -- Blackcat (talk) 23:54, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  Declined not at this time.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:30, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Possible irreliable source, wiki website or blog. Anyone can add his own post and edit it. Globally (in all wikis) invalidate is requested. HanzoHanzo (talk) 11:27, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

  Comment There is allowed use at some wikis, and it is not banned at any wikis.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:51, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
@HanzoHanzo:   Declined at this time as a stale request. More information required.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:51, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Spammed on same article as from where I just blacklisted a site. —Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 14:32, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@Beetstra:   Added to Spam blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 14:34, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

url shorteners (Nov 2018)

 — billinghurst sDrewth 00:35, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

  Added to Spam blacklist. -- — billinghurst sDrewth 00:35, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Proposed removals

  This section is for archiving proposals that a website be unlisted.

The all inclusive *.be filter is blocking YouTube short links ( from being used. This also includes wikis not in the Wikipedia network. I am asking that itself be allowed while still filtering the rest of *.be. Thank you. Alexia E. Smith (talk) 19:05, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Additional information: This affects over 2,000 wikis and would require manually editing every MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist on those wikis along with continual new wikis to maintain this exception. Trying to explain to non-technical users on how to transform the shortened URL into the full URL every instance this issue comes up is time consuming especially when it is the preferred URL presented to end users by the YouTube service when requesting a sharing URL. I see that in the past this request has been denied multiple times with those proposing it bringing up the same issue; attempting to get non-technical users to transform the URL. This spam blacklist affects not just Wikimedia projects, but thousands of external projects as well. The argument of blacklisting certain videos on YouTube can be solved by expanding the regex to also include (youtu\.be|youtube\com) in the regex. Alexia E. Smith (talk) 15:52, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
@Alexia E. Smith: It is not a .be rule, this is a specific That rule is added for a reason.
Although I agree that the regexes could be expanded, that same story as your initial story applies - that needs to be clear to the maintainers for all wikis (at least within the MediaWiki realm). There is still a significant amount of material on youtube that simply should not be added for copyright reasons (and that often tends to be the material that is linked, much of the material where there is no copyright concern simply never will get linked as it is not applicable to Wikipedia), or is otherwise discouraged to be linked here.
I don't think that anything outside of the 800+ MediaWiki wikis is going to be a direct reason for us to remove rules. One could consider to expand in the installation documentation or in the example-whitelist of the installation to specifically whitelist domains when used on external installations. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 12:45, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
@Alexia E. Smith: sorry, broke the ping. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 13:01, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
@Beetstra: (Ping doesn't seem to ping me anyway.) If Extension:SpamBlacklist had a simple way to set a setting to globally whitelist a domain this would not be an issue. For me to whitelist this domain I will need to automate a solution to whitelist it on 2,126 wikis and also apply that to any new wikis that are created on a daily basis. The other solution would be to fork Extension:SpamBlacklist to have a setting that would allow a PHP setting based whitelist. However, I am trying to avoid forking the MediaWiki core more than necessary. I figured it was better to appeal here than to go with the less desirable options first. Alexia E. Smith (talk) 15:38, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
@Alexia E. Smith: as I said, the list here is mainly to protect mediawiki projects. I don’t think we should delist here for outside projects. Did you consider running a cross wiki bot on your wikis? —Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 16:10, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
@Alexia E. Smith:   Declined  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:23, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

This is simple travel related blog and their nothing spamming so i want to unblock this site on Wikipedia please help.

— The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) (added by  — billinghurst sDrewth as caught in abusefilter)

Wikipedia articles are not the place for you to spam your domain. Wikipedias are generally not the places for blogs. Wikipedias are not the place for conflict of interest editing.  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:50, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
  Declined no further information provided  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:23, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Very popular website, see Sci-Hub. Right now can't create a link to this website. Denbkh (talk) 18:17, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

@Denbkh:   Declined, see the discussions on en.wikipedia where concerns towards copyright violations are expressed and the global policies towards that. Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:20, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Firstly, please see the relevant section at Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/2018-10.

As with copyright music, we don't usually provide backdoor links, so probably worthwhile creating a link to the original paper and its published site, rather than the SciHub which have proved problematic. That the site creates redirects to get around blocks should be an indicator of dodgy behaviour. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:20, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello, is product research and comparison website which provides users with product information. Pricekart website doesn't sell any products, it only provides information about various products to users. I found that is blacklisted on Wiki. On searching more about it, I found that 2 accounts were posting some links from this domain and other domains too. This website is now blacklisted. I request you to please remove it from wiki blacklist as it is an information website which helps users to make a better buying decision. The reason for request of removal is not because I want to add random links and violate wiki laws. But, because I found few articles on Wikipedia with not sufficient information., being a research site, can add value to wiki pages.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 10:39, 28 November 2018‎

@   Declined, blacklisted on,   Defer to w:en:Mediawiki talk:spam-blacklist. Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 08:06, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello, can you please remove from all blacklists. This is an educational site by a faculty member (professor at University of Southern California) and his research needs to be often cited for astronautics history, technical descriptions and research links. It would be helpful if you can let know the reasons, if any, for this domain to be blacklisted at the first place. Thank you —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aste520 (talk)

Aste520, this domain is not globally blacklisted. It is locally blacklisted on the English Wikipedia. Thank you, Vermont (talk) 02:24, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Vermont How can I help get it removed. Can you please help with the requisite link.

-- ebuck 02:27, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

You've already left a request at the proper place on the English Wikipedia. Please wait for it to be reviewed. Vermont (talk) 02:38, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
  nothing to do as not globally blacklisted. User referred to enWP.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:40, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Troubleshooting and problems

  This section is for archiving Troubleshooting and problems.


  This section is for archiving Discussions.

more than 3000 entries

related: Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2015-01#Now_restarting_the_original_debate

hi! (ping billinghurst, Beetstra) At user:lustiger seth/sbl log stats/all wikis no hits I started again to make a list of all sbl entries that have 0 hits in all ~900 wikis since they were added to list (but not earlier than 2013, when the sbl log came into existence). The script takes some time (another week probably). Half of the sbl entries (~4800) are checked already. more than 3000 never have been the reason for a blocked edit.
What do you think? Shall we delete those entries (except from the url shorteners) from the list? Advantage: the lesser entries, the clearer the structure. -- seth (talk) 10:28, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

@Lustiger seth: Thank you for this effort. I think most of the non-shortener domains can be removed.
Re 'clearer [the] structure': Would it be possible to 'sort' the list at some point, stuff all the shorteners until now into a 'section', with at the end a mark from 'below here unsorted'. In that case, every year or so we can sort the unsorted into the above 'groups', and it would make clean-up of non-shorteners easier (you can even take them out before your parsing, no need to check whether they were abused or not, we keep 'm anyway if they are still a shortening service). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 07:36, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
@Beetstra: I agree that merging/grouping the shorteners would be reasonable. -- seth (talk) 08:06, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I am interpreting that as you have been running through all wikis Special:log/spamblacklist. On checking some randoms, I see that some listings have come from a Poke, eg. User:COIBot/LinkReports/ so there has been concerns that have caused addition. Have we done a cross reference against generated XWiki reports as numbers of urls come about from AbuseFilter hits, so if we have additions to blacklist, and generated XWiki reports, I am not certain that we want those removed. Also if we have a regex in place, I am loath to remove those as they have been specifically added from an evidence-base.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:08, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
    I am also seeing numbers of essay writing domains in the list, and while they have not been spammed, I am not certain that I want them removed. Call me paranoid, or call me nasty! If we are to remove urls, maybe we want to eyeball cull-proposed removals and remove those we would like to keep.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:47, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
    @Billinghurst: We could easily cut the regexes which have been added in the last # years (2?) from that list. If seth would re-run the script in a year (e.g.) then those with still no hits would come.
    Alternatively, we run a script on those filters, extract all the domains in those ... (heck, I could teach LiWa to read certain filters as prescribed in the settings and extract domains from that ... but that would be a feature that at the earliest I could write next summer; moreover I would love to have LiWa to have access to all special:log/spamblacklist, so I could record attempted additions there as well - attempts to spam would be a welcome addition to the coibot reports ...). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 05:17, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
    (barging in) Maybe you are interested in checking against potential positives of my lists before removing? All of their entries are not collected automatically but are handpicked: spam links on Commons, spamming wikis. Best, --Achim (talk) 14:13, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
    @Achim55: Your list can be loaded into COIBot; if you use IRC, we can give you permissions with COIBot to add these to be monitored per Small Wiki Monitoring Team/IRC or if not, we can give you permission so you can add them to User:COIBot/Poke. @Beetstra: are you thinking of converting to json, or something similar? If not, then I am going to need to get js/css permissions :-/  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
    @Billinghurst and Achim55: I cannot just convert to json, it is currently not valid json. I will have to go to regular pages and e.g. get template-editor access for COIBot. But that is besides the point. We can also poke that list, and I will give access to achim to poke as well. —Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 04:24, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I would think that there would be value in at least keeping the old list of removed domains somewhere and having COIBot use that list at least for "monitor", or proactively pushing those in to be monitored.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:39, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

reading the blacklists ..

@Lustiger seth: related to your work here .. how do you manage to read ALL spam-blacklist-logs? I thought they were admin only .. ?? If they can be (bot-)read that would be very welcome, I could then build in the capability into LiWa3/COIBot, so the attempts to circumvent the blacklist can be shown in the reports which is very welcome evidence in case of de-blacklisting-requests, as well as for sock-hunting and finding spammers implementing workarounds (spammers attempt one blacklisted domain, and other that are not yet blacklisted .. that is a one-strike-and-you-are-out situation suitable for immediate blacklisting/blocks of the other domains). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 05:26, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

@Beetstra: they used to be, apparently the developers decided they should be open to all logged in users in phab:T64781. — xaosflux Talk 15:49, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: I I never understood the initial choice... thanks, I will need to code this into my bots! Thanks! —Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 17:04, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
another related ticket phab:T184483.
I use the replica db at toolserver. -- seth (talk) 21:28, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Réclamation pour mon article

Je souhaite que lien posant problème soit retirer. Vu qu'il est vérifiable, vous donc aussi vérifier. Merci Bob jeci (talk) 10:53, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

@Bob jeci: Hi, you are going to need to provide specific information. We cannot guess where you are editing, and the domain which you are wishing to add.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:21, 17 November 2018 (UTC)


Juste préciser que les seul informations vérifiable sur moi que je voulais ajouter je les copié à partir d'une recherche faite sur Google. Vous rentrez ( N'guessan Enoh Jean cinel) et vous aurez les liens que j'ai proposé. Merxi Bob jeci (talk) 08:15, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

@Bob jeci: It is unclear what you wish to achieve. If you are saying that a search link for Google is blocked, yes, that is the purpose of the blacklisting, and won't be changed. I suggest that you discuss that matter at the wiki where you are looking to add your information.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:45, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Smart template for deferring to local wikis?

Can we have a template, e.g. {{Deferlocal|w|en}} that results in a text 'Defer to English Wikipedia Spam blacklist' (but displaying the target in the local language etc.?) --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 11:48, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@Beetstra: done. Defaults to enWP where parameterless. $1= sister, $2 = lang; $3 = override text link  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:56, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
  Comment someone wish to turn it into a translated template. <shrug>  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:58, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Return to "Spam blacklist/Archives/2018-11" page.