Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/2020-08

Active discussions

Proposed additions

  This section is for completed requests that a website be blacklisted

betting spam

Betting links spammed in hits.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:25, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst:   Added to Spam blacklist. -- — billinghurst sDrewth 00:26, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

More fake sites

Pile of impersonation domains found at w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nickjames0423, all have been spammed on at least one other wiki. GeneralNotability (talk) 21:47, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

@GeneralNotability:   Added to Spam blacklist. --DannyS712 (talk) 22:13, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

    • Link/text requested to be blacklisted:

    • Link/text requested to be blacklisted:

    • Link/text requested to be blacklisted:
    • Link/text requested to be blacklisted:

Cross-wiki refspamming by multiple throwaway socks (see en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Emel Ulusoy, en:Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Refspam across many articles, en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/ Possibly we should be blacklisting MDPI entirely as this is not their first foray into refspamming, their reputation as a source is non-stellar, and there's precedent from the siteban of OMICS employees. JzG (talk) 09:37, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

@JzG:   Added to Spam blacklist. I have 11231 rows for mdpi in the db. This sock has made a good 5% of them ... --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 10:23, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Forgot to ping the other interested parties: @Smartse, GeneralNotability, and Mz7:. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 10:25, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Wow. That's a lot of processed meat. JzG (talk) 11:54, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
I would object to blacklisting MDPI altogether; they're dubious but not always useless. And I don't think it's likely that this particular spam comes from MDPI itself; I think it's merely from someone who used them as a publisher. No objection to blocking the much more specific links that you list (all of them). —David Eppstein (talk) 01:40, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
@David Eppstein: It is the two specific links for, so it seems pretty specific to what has been blocked.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:09, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
I know that's what is in the current proposal. My comment was in response to JzG's "Possibly we should be blacklisting MDPI entirely". —David Eppstein (talk) 19:21, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

To record reason: Spammed en masse at multiple wikis, see:

18:04 <Urbanecm|CVN> whoadded
18:04 <+COIBot> 149 records; Editors who have added Skdjashksjfbinc08032000 (111), Barakobama420 (13), 2409:4043:20E:4BD6:A5BC:61BB:6F6:84AC (12), 2409:4043:20E:4BD6:CC82:1D96:F06:2147 (6), Bhanubhai420 (4), 2409:4043:182:27E8:0:0:2B43:A8B0 (2), 2409:4043:2D92:65F2:5912:8CA7:111F:B0A8 (1).

--Martin Urbanec (talk) 16:07, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

@Martin Urbanec:   Added to Spam blacklist. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 16:08, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Crosswiki talk page spam: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. Same as Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/ – Aranya (talk) 21:54, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

@Aranya:   Added to Spam blacklist. -- — billinghurst sDrewth 07:56, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Crosswiki spam (enwiki, hiwiki, mrwiki) --Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:38, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Martin Urbanec:   Added to Spam blacklist. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:38, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Crosswiki spam, dewikibooks and itwikibooks at the very least. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:48, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Martin Urbanec:   Added to Spam blacklist. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:49, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

I saw someone using this to link to search results. Do we really not have blacklisted? --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 13:32, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

@Beetstra:   Added to Spam blacklist, it really seems to have disappeared somewhere, there has been a previous addition in 2014. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 13:42, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Xwiki spammed at multiple wikis. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:44, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Martin Urbanec:   Added to Spam blacklist. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:49, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Fake official sites has been repeatedly inserted to en:Fiverr (see history) by IPs and a few new accounts. Each time disguising it as the official link. The WHOIS result shows that it is not official, so likely another case of replacing the official link with a referral link that has been popular lately. One IP, 2600:100D:B069:3C4E:9D7D:DD2B:F727:5379, who added the link to Fiverr, went on to try to add the same type of fake link at en:LiveJasmin as well as en:SeekingArrangement. has also been added to the Italian WP and has been added to the German WP. Apparition11 (talk) 12:21, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Apparition11:   Added to Spam blacklist. -- — billinghurst sDrewth 12:22, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

URL shortening services. Dede2008 (talk) 17:31, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

@Dede2008:   Added to Spam blacklist. --DannyS712 (talk) 23:06, 24 August 2020 (UTC),

  • See COIBot reports, cross-wiki spam by IPs and registered users. GeneralNotability (talk) 19:32, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
@GeneralNotability:   Added to Spam blacklist. -- — billinghurst sDrewth 22:20, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Appears to be the same spam group as the last entry, cross-wiki spam by IPs and at least one registered user. GeneralNotability (talk) 12:49, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
@GeneralNotability:   Added to Spam blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 13:13, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

See COIBot report. Cross-wiki SEO spam from dynamic IPs. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 20:21, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Suffusion of Yellow:   Added to Spam blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:08, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

After blacklisting, a new fake official link, was added to en:Fiverr by an IP on the same range as before. If there is a better way to handle this situation other than posting here, please let me know since I doubt this will be the last link, but I'm at a loss at how to better deal with it. Apparition11 (talk) 12:56, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@Apparition11:   Added to Spam blacklist. -- — billinghurst sDrewth 14:09, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Thanks again. Now, the same IP, 2600:100D:B052:42EC:9A7:10E7:3670:922F, has moved back to en:LiveJasmin and de:LiveJasmin to add since was blacklisted. Apparition11 (talk) 19:45, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@Apparition11:   Added to Spam blacklist. --DannyS712 (talk) 20:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
@Apparition11: we are just going to have to be a little reactive and do a clean up utilising global search. <shrug> They cannot cause much damage  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:16, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: I was making out a new report at the same time you were replying. Is there a better place for me to report these links? I don't mind doing it at all, but I hate to flood this page constantly. Apparition11 (talk) 22:21, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
@Apparition11: It is the purpose of the page, and is the record that we have when someone runs a search sometime into the future. So, it is not flooding the page, all perfectly acceptable.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:25, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Thanks, I appreciate the reassurance and all the help! Apparition11 (talk) 22:34, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Yet more fake official links

Sorry for the whack-a-mole, but 2600:100D:B052:42EC:9A7:10E7:3670:922F is still at it (though their IP constantly changes). They are adding to en:LiveJasmin, adding to de:LiveJasmin, and adding to Brazzers Wikidata. Apparition11 (talk) 22:17, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@Apparition11:   Added to Spam blacklist. -- — billinghurst sDrewth 22:26, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
I have blacklisted which seems to be the target for some of the redirects and enables COIBot to better report against it when it sees the redirects.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:32, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. Honestly, that's over my head, but sounds good :) Apparition11 (talk) 22:35, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
@Apparition11: In User:COIBot/XWiki/ additions you will see that the added links are converting to redirects which is showing that people are trying to redirect via a referral service and scam a bit of money. Whenever COIBot sees a blacklisted target it will better report those and flag.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:45, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Very nice. I spent some time today trying to figure out how to see the redirect to no avail. That was exactly what I was looking for! Thanks! Apparition11 (talk) 22:53, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Spam. Probably malware too, I wouldn't click. EstrellaSuecia (talk) 13:48, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@EstrellaSuecia:   Added to Spam blacklist. -- — billinghurst sDrewth 04:17, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Cross-wiki spam via posting links to blogs and rumours on a very ambiguous website.--Joél be back (talk) 21:38, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Important update: the user who posted these links to Russian Wikipedia is indefinitely blocked for spam, and the users who posted them to English and Ukrainian Wikis nowadays have links on in their profiles (it's very possible that these are accounts of the same user in three different Wikipedias).--Joél be back (talk) 20:10, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
  Declined at this time. The site is used on numerous wikis, and it is blacklisted on none. The site does not meet the criteria for blacklisting.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:10, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Crosswiki-spam reappeared today on svwiki. Not the first time I've seen this link. EstrellaSuecia (talk) 13:48, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@EstrellaSuecia:   Declined if it is problematic at a particular wiki then it should be blacklisted locally. I am not comfortable that at least some of the use is accepted by one wiki.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:24, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Spam. EstrellaSuecia (talk) 13:48, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@EstrellaSuecia:   Added to Spam blacklist. -- — billinghurst sDrewth 09:22, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

More fake official sites

Another fake official link... The same IP, 2600:100D:B052:42EC:9A7:10E7:3670:922F, fresh off a 31 hour block, came back to a new article, to change the official link to Apparition11 (talk) 23:58, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

They then added to en:Bluehost and added to en:Hostgator. Apparition11 (talk) 01:19, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

@Apparition11:   Added to Spam blacklist, and I have re-blocked the enWP IP address -- — billinghurst sDrewth 01:27, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Xwiki spam, see COIBot report. Thanks. Majavah talk/contribs/sul 08:48, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

@Majavah:   Declined at this time as enWQ can add to their blacklist and it is predominantly that site. I will add a note that I have COIBot more actively monitoring the domain so if it continues we can quickly blacklist at a later time.   Defer to q:en:Mediawiki talk:spam-blacklist  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:12, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
@Majavah:   Added to q:en:MediaWiki:Spam blacklist. --DannyS712 (talk) 01:27, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

[8] [9]. Probably related to User:COIBot/XWiki/ – Aranya (talk) 23:16, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Aranya:   Added to Spam blacklist.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:39, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Proposed removals

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


I have a question regarding listing my sources. I've been working in gambling industry for a few years now, and I noticed that articles on Wikipedia regarding this topic are not very wholesome. I was thinking about editing them, but in the past (on different accounts) I have tackled a problem with listing my sources. The sites I usually use are: or and also and many more, these are the most reliable ones for me and many others. I have noticed is blacklisted, I am wondering why is that. I have seen this website as a source in articles and people use it to educate themselves on such topics. Can you specify what kind of website would be accepted and considered valuable and trustworthy, since these are the biggest and (likely) most resourceful articles on gambling and responsible gambling in the field. I will be looking forward to your guidance on this matter. Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AdamW030 (talk)

@AdamW030: You would be better asking on the wiki where you are wishing to edit about what they consider their reliable sources, numbers of wikis have reasonable guidance on the topic. Our role here is a little different and more looking at system-wide abuse. I would encourage you to also read about conflict of interest editing at the same wikis.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:00, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

I understand, thanks for the answer. Also, in the meantime I noticed that there is global spam ban on all .guru domains. Since, one of my sources is a domain like that, but should not be considered spam, where exactly can I request it to be whitelisted? Does it also vary from wiki to wiki? Thanks in advance for your response.

I cannot see that we have a global blacklisting on all .guru TLD domains. Which line in the page do you believe that is? All whitelisting is performed at each local wiki.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:08, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
If you mean global block, that being enWP, then that would be there sitewide block on that .guru TLD. It is not a global blacklist.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:59, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
@Billinghurst and AdamW030: is blacklisted specifically on meta, see Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2020-05#casino_sites. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 06:52, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Yes, that was known, and wasn't the additional commentary. The latter comment was solely regarding the comment that .guru TLD was globally blacklisted.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:03, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Just as a general remark, yes, this may be a nice resource, but I do not see this as an authoritative source for this material. The front-page of this site is riddled with referrals to other gambling sites. If the subject itself is notable, then a suitable link for that page can be whitelisted, but this is not a suitable source for anything else. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 07:54, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

  • Can I put in a vote for "fuck no" here please? This was spammed, and if it's removed here I will have to add it straight back to the enWP blacklist because I have yet to see a single credible good-faith request to use it as a source. JzG (talk) 09:42, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
@AdamW030:   Declined please request local whitelisting for the specific url(s) instead DannyS712 (talk) 17:02, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi, we are requesting to check whether it is possible to unblock our website We provide tenancy law information to tenants and just wanted to add new aspects of rental rights to the reader. Regards, —The preceding unsigned comment was added by writingmc (talk) .

  not globally blocked, best that I can see is that it is blocked locally at deWikt,   Defer to de:wikt:Mediawiki talk:spam-blacklist  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:01, 19 August 2020 (UTC) snooker results and statistics database. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 19:54, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

@The Vintage Feminist:   nothing to do as it is not globally blocked. You will need to talk to English Wikipedia.   Defer to w:en:Mediawiki talk:spam-blacklist  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:17, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
@Billinghurst:, thank you, I'll try there. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 00:27, 25 August 2020 (UTC) (Lightshot) is a screenshot upload service. It was added because it was thought to be URL shortener, according to the archives. But it is not an url shortener. I request it removed for blacklist. --ToprakM 14:02, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@ToprakM:   Removed from Spam blacklist.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:31, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Troubleshooting and problems

  This section is for archiving Troubleshooting and problems.


  This section is for archiving Discussions.

Propose automating archiving

Time to set this page to archive based on triggers of closed/resolved articles. If that is problematic, then please identify the issues that you have or to identify the conditions that you would want to see applied, or not applied.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:17, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Yes, 3 days after 'decline' or 'added' the discussion can be removed. Otherwise 14 days without comment / action. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 06:27, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
+1 from me --DannyS712 (talk) 17:00, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

My Domain Blocked By Wikipedia

Hi, I checked my website very carefully and I'm sure that it doesn't violate the Community Standards. Could you please reconsider my website? please team wikipedia review it again and unblock it able to share with my fans. Reagrds, pcbeducation —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hamsi97 (talk)

@Hamsi97: I don't see that your website is a reliable source as specified at English Wikipedia. I also see that your site is spammed by you, and by what seems sock accounts, which would generally be considered as conflict of interest editing. I don't see why we would want your site linked by the wikipedias, or at Commons, especially not as how the editing has been done.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:01, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: I apologize for my mistakes actully i was not know about the policy of wikipedia now i'm agreed with the policy and never do much and no mean edits i'm requesting you to please unblock my domain i'll be very thanks for for this kindness please :@Billinghurst: unlbock [pcbeducation]
Uncertain why we need to unblock the domain.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:48, 8 August 2020 (UTC)


Please remove or fix this expression: this is unexpectedly blocking a wide range of websites, namely all subdomains of that end with a "g" like (@Beetstra, who added it and already attempted a fix). Orlodrim (talk) 22:24, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Orlodrim: I have changed to (?<!-)g\.co/ and I hope that resolves the issue. If it is still problematic then I am happy to suspend it until it can be refined. Thanks for your diligence in checking and reporting.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:58, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
@Orlodrim and Billinghurst: I have further adapted it to (?<!-)\bg\.co\b. It is a string that is annoying as it does appear in other links as well. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 05:39, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
@Beetstra: I would still recommend a terminating slash, as it is unlikely to do harm and it stops any other complicating TLD components.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:12, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: but I am not sure if other g.<tld>'s are not google redirect domains either. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 06:18, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
Which way are you applying precautionary principle?  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:12, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
Return to "Spam blacklist/Archives/2020-08" page.