User:SpamReportBot/cw/nakedafrica.net

nakedafrica.net edit

nakedafrica.net

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)

This list is intended to see how the external link gets used, it does not imply that involved accounts are having a conflict of interest in adding the link, or that the involved accounts are spamming the link.

First link added on 2008-04-19 17:39:21: last link added on 2008-04-19 18:25:48

Log entry:

\bnakedafrica\.net\b # ADMINNAME # [[User:SpamReportBot/cw/nakedafrica.net|ReportBot page]]

(ru_wikipedia) 2008-04-19 17:39:21 -- http://www.nakedafrica.net added to: [Африка] by 84.42.211.207 -- diff
(ro_wikipedia) 2008-04-19 17:54:23 -- http://www.nakedafrica.net added to: [Africa] by 84.42.211.207 -- diff
(sw_wikipedia) 2008-04-19 18:08:54 -- http://www.nakedafrica.net added to: [Afrika] by 84.42.211.207 -- diff
(fi_wikipedia) 2008-04-19 18:09:26 -- http://www.nakedafrica.net added to: [Afrikka] by 84.42.211.207 -- diff
(fi_wikipedia) 2008-04-19 18:12:48 -- http://www.nakedafrica.net added to: [Afrikka] by 84.42.211.207 -- diff
(it_wikipedia) 2008-04-19 18:25:48 -- http://www.nakedafrica.net added to: [Afrika] by 84.42.211.207 -- diff

Request Status - Closed

Does not justify meta blacklisting

Definitely spammed but not a typical spam site; it's a traveler's professional-quality photos of Africa. If spammed on en.wikipedia, my home project, I'd give the spammer a warning and then leave it alone unless it recurred. Based on my belief that we should act on SpamReportBot/cw only when the spam is egregious and/or linking to really lousy sites, I recommend leaving this for local Wikipedias to keep or remove.

What do others think? --A. B. ^(talk) 01:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Kinda agree. I see fi wp does not want it but others seem ok (or not to have noticed). I do think we need to be careful with the bot ones. Global messaging for IPs would be great in this case. Inclined to agree with A. B. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:18, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I am never too happy with these type of sites, I mean, everyone with a picture site can put a link on Africa as soon as they have been to Africa and made some pictures (in spirit of en:WP:NOT#REPOSITORY ..) ... But indeed, revert, close, and see if it reoccurs. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} (en: U, T) 14:06, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

The link has been inserted elsewhere too:

The article the link has been inserted to in Italian Wikipedia is about the videogame Afrika, the other articles seems to be about the continent Africa.

The same IP inserted the link nahaafrika.cz in cs.wikipedia

nahaafrika.cz

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)

http://cs.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Subsaharsk%C3%A1_Afrika&diff=prev&oldid=2487052

http://cs.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sahara&diff=prev&oldid=2487093

Some days ago the same link was inserted by 85.70.66.173 :

http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speci%C3%A1ln%C3%AD:Contributions/85.70.66.173

--Jorunn 20:09, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Looking at this one I am inclined to list it (& the other domain) per Jorunn - any other views? If not I'll do it tomorrow --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:20, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Agree; these are unneeded. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 23:10, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Closed - Added --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:58, 27 April 2008 (UTC)