MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/July 2019

Factor 8

I think this website should be delisted as it contains good sourcing which cannot be found elsewhere and is reputable. Firstly, as far as I can tell, it is not the content of the website or its reputation that is in question. It was in fact originally listed as one user has cited the website as a source too frequently. That user has not been active on Wikipedia for almost 8 months which, I think, makes it fair to say that alleged spamming would not occur again. I have ran a Google search for '"factor 8 campaign" blood news' and note that the organisation itself is cited widely in UK National press backing-up its credibility and is also listed as a Core Participant in the Infected Blood Inquiry. The organisation was also thanked by a British High Court Judge for its work. Although as is clear the question is not the site itself, but one user. I do not think that wiki sourcing should suffer as the result of the actions of one user who is now inactive, the likelihood of any future spam is extremely unlikely due to the nature of the website and therefore I propose the site is delisted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VinseFosta (talk • contribs) 06:10, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

legalraasta.com

Only extant/possibly valid use is at Limited liability partnership (and maybe questionable, not a secondary or tertiary source but the primary page of a company). Thanks, —PaleoNeonate – 19:04, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added MER-C 14:03, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Drug/pharmacy spam

Link(s)
Spammers

Please blacklist. -KH-1 (talk) 00:31, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added MER-C 14:06, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

lulu.com

Self-publishing site. Doesn't seem like a spam site. Not sure why it's blacklisted, but I was attempting to update their main entry and could not add documentation for their products and services due to the blacklist. --Paul.vt42 (talk) 13:01, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Paul.vt42: It is on the blacklist because it pays per view (i.e., if someone goes to a document you have uploaded, you get money. It therefore pays to have your material linked from Wikipedia as that increases traffic to you site). We will therefore not remove the whole domain. We will however consider the whitelisting of specific documents hosted on the server if they are specifically needed to improve a specific page, and are not replaceable by anything that does not have such problems. Hence:  Defer to Whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:00, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Beetstra: Not sure how Wikipedia defines 'pay per view' but the site does have a retail store. Does that qualify as pay per view? Thank you for the info about Whitelisting, I'll review this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul.vt42 (talk • contribs) 14:37, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Paul.vt42: You make an account on lulu, you upload material on lulu using your account. Someone else looks at the material you uploaded: lulu earns money, and you earn money. And whether your material is reliable or not does not matter too much. Barring exceptions, there is not much need to link there (better to use reliable sources), theexceptions can be handled at the whitelist ( Defer to Whitelist). --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:14, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kissedsmiley (talk) 19:25, 4 July 2019 (UTC) hi, pls see https connect.lulu.com en/discussion/179917 . Lulu does not pay people to open pages. They pay people after people click through on the store to buy a book. If the person offered the book for a nonzero price, then the author and lulu gets money. This has nothing to do with spam and is a terrific use of the internet. Pls make sure they are whitelisted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kissedsmiley (talk • contribs) 19:25, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Except for the free books, to see the content you need to pay. That is a great incentive for spam. And it is not a reliable source anyway. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:53, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Credenceresearch.com

I think some of the competitors are spamming this website on Wikipedia. This website is widely known in Sanjose California, China, Korea, Japan and in India its headquarter is in Sanjose, the physical address and phone no are provided in the website and in google. Also, websites like Bloomberg, Forbes and Yahoo Finance mention the research of this website in there Article and Blogs it makes clear that the website is not a spamming website. So I propose the site is delisted.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Robsoncredence (talk • contribs) 08:41, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Satyam7252
@Robsoncredence: The function of the spam blacklist is to protect Wikipedia. You may very well be right, but removing it could result in anyone starting to spam it again. I think you need to show that the spamming stopped. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:17, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

onlineitguru.com

Spammed by

—Rutilant 05:53, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added to blacklist. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:05, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ionlifeindia.com

XLinkBot appears to have this link but IP addresses circumvent it. Thanks, —PaleoNeonate – 08:23, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added to blacklist. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:09, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

_-0-9a-z+.guru

I wanted to add a note about the size of Base64 data URIs for Data URI scheme and refer to base64.guru/developers/data-uri/gzip, but was surprised to find out that an entire TLD is blacklisted. I have seen the discussion about the guru TLD (which is supposedly used for spamming), but a quick look at the spamblacklist logs suggests me that blocking an entire TLD is most likely a bad idea, at least because there is no massive spam using this TLD (for example, from 1 March 2019 until today were blocked only 13 domains, including ludwig.guru, thevpn.guru, satcom.guru). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vittorio.petrovi (talk • contribs) 01:20, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Defer to Whitelist If we start seeing a lot of whitelisting requests for guru domains, we can revisit, but that doesn't seem to be the case at this time. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:44, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I’m pretty sure that you will never see “a lot of whitelisting requests”, because most users think that the site they specified is blocked for a good reason (the error clearly states that the edit “contains a new external link to a site registered on Wikipedia’s blacklist”). They will not even suspect that someone on Wikipedia decided to block a whole TLD. Illustrative example: today a Master Editor II tried to refer to a guru domain, but decided to just leave a broken link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vittorio.petrovi (talk • contribs) 10:50, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Vittorio.petrovi: That is quite possible, but there is another side to that, where we would remove the whole rule and see an influx of the problematic sites that resulted in the blacklisting (with a very occasional good link). The warning you get is showing what you can/have to do. I'm sorry, until we see an amount of good links that we cannot handle anymore with the whitelist we'll likely use this method to curb the links. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:18, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Beetstra: If you really think it’s reasonable to block a whole TLD, perhaps you would like to use /wiki/Special:Log/spamblacklist in order to compare .guru against other TLDs or verify if a three-year statement is still valid. Nevertheless, I understand that I do not have the right to interfere with your actions, so I apologize for taking your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vittorio.petrovi (talk • contribs)

casino.guru

Hi I tried to add casino.guru as a source of my adjustment for articles. I am following this site for quite a long time, and has provided me with very useful information, that I could not find even here. Now they also added a new Responsible Gaming section, in which they want to further educate not only players, but anyone who want to extend their knowledge in fuctioning of casinos or the scam tacticts they are using. I have seen websites with much less information being listed as sources. I honestly think this site would be helpful for many people interested in various topics. Another weird thing is, that even though I was told that this site is blacklisted, I could not find it anywhere in the blacklist.

See above. All *.guru domains are blacklisted given that nearly all of them do not meet WP:RS guidelines. For those that might be appropriate links,  Defer to Whitelist. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:00, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, that is the reason why I wrote to you. I believe the site I am trying to you as a source is not violating your guidelines in any way. As I said, it would be beneficial for the community to whitelist the aformentioned site because of the valuable information it can bring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marti229 (talk • contribs) 10:53, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We don't handle whitelisting requests here. You'll need to convince someone on the MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist board that (1) the link meets our reliable sources guidelines for the article you're intending to use at for and (2) you don't have any conflict-of-interests with the site in question (i.e., you don't own the site nor are you affiliated with it in any way).OhNoitsJamie Talk 12:39, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

jsbmarketresearch.com

Spam for a marketing website, 30+ additions by various SPAs (and a few erroneous good-faith edits). Several warnings have been ignored. As a promotional website with questionable credentials, the source is not reliable and has no foreseeable encyclopedic usages (and even then, whitelisting would be an option). GermanJoe (talk) 10:00, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@GermanJoe: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:01, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

futuresharks.com

Futuresharks is a website that will manufacture an article about you for $500. (If such websites are not added to the blacklist, please remove my listing.) I've seen it used on three new articles in the last day: G50X, Top Tier, Shaun Lee, which cite fake articles such as [https://futuresharks.com/interview-w-indias-youngest-upcoming-edm-producer-g50x/], and I've removed the source from 4 other older articles. It has been used by "entrepreneurs" here since at least 2017 --89.153.64.16 (talk) 23:26, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:05, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

usaherald.com

USAHerald is a website that purports be a news site, but is a blog used to get links for negative reputation management and blackhat SEO. Claims go without citation, and fake articles targeting people the site owner/administrator simply does not like are common with the goal of ranking them in search engines, see [1]. USAHerald backlink analyses show numerous comment spam campaigns, see Comment 207 here [2]. USAHerald.com uses Wikipedia links and citations to improve its domain authority. Sponsored content is also linked on Wikipedia, see [3] 207.144.76.106 (talk) 17:24, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any obvious spam campaigns from the link summary. Whether or not this is a reliable source is certainly questionable. This probably belongs on the reliable sources noticeboard instead. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:52, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure I understand. A site that is basically exclusively used to trash neighbors but use wikipedia as a link authority isn’t spam? I will add it to the reliable sources notice board, but this seems very obviously problematic from its HTTPS link reference. Just look at “healthcare in Costa Rica” 75.138.97.214 (talk) 06:04, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vamanan's wordpress

This is the official wordpress site of music historian Vamanan. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:39, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

indianholiday.com

I found that Wikipedia has been blacklisted indianholiday.com. When I checked the blacklisted list, I found that there was no reason for blacklisting by your administrator or contributor. Indian Holiday is a very reputed website in India for tour and travel service since 1990. This Company has won two-time national tourism awards. The Indian holiday Pvt. ltd company is approved by tourism of India. This site contains unique and useful information, tours to Foreigner Tourist who come to India to explore Indian culture, history, monuments, and cuisine.

Perhaps someone did a spammy thing. That's why a Wiki administrator blocks the website. Also, I found that Indian Holiday is blacklisted since 2018 march. So, I think indainholiday.com should be delisted. Because this site provides provide a useful query to foreigner tourist. Please look in the matter and help me out with this problem. Adityainfoboy (talk) 09:08, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2008_Archive_Mar_3#Assorted_Indian_spamming and MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/January_2012#indianholiday.com. ¶ How do links to package tour companies benefit encyclopedia articles? -- Hoary (talk) 10:02, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done "Wikipedia does not benefit from links to package tour companies" is the correct answer. Someone did indeed do a "spammy thing." OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:17, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I got your point. But due to the blacklist. I am unable to make a company profile on Wikipedia like (yatra.com and makemytrip.com). Please provide a way so that I could add company information on Wikipedia. And I believe company information on Wikipedia could help people to find out accurate information and service about the company. Adityainfoboy (talk) 06:21, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No. The other companies you mention are large, NASDAQ traded companies, and therefore are likely to satisfy WP:CORP notability, unlike indianholiday, which you are obviously affiliated with. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:01, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Some small companies merit articles. Are there independent sources for an article on this company? If so, then somebody can use them to make an article on the company. (And if not, then nobody can make an article on the company.) -- Hoary (talk) 14:07, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

dnbamerica.com

Mirror domain of dnbnumber.com (already blacklisted), spammed in Data Universal Numbering System. Likely fraud (DUNS has an authorized page to apply for such numbers on their own official website), certainly spam - please blacklist. GermanJoe (talk) 06:22, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@GermanJoe: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (Help!) 20:50, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

blockchain.news

Low-quality cryptocurrency blog. JohnnyBCN started adding reference links, then tried to remove themselves from the WP:GS/Crypto notifications list. Wmbc918 started up immediately after. All instances reverted, but there's no circumstance in which this will ever be a useful reference - David Gerard (talk) 10:36, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@David Gerard: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (Help!) 20:51, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

p2pmarketdata.com

Spamming for a new P2P finance blog (since January 2019) by various SPAs/IPs. The blog includes a referral scheme for cashback boni. Four previous warnings have been ignored. GermanJoe (talk) 05:02, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@GermanJoe: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (Help!) 20:57, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I was trying to add a link to P2PMarketData as a real source and was told we are on the blacklist. Can you please check this? How do I get P2PMarketData (p2pmarketdata.com) removed from the blacklist? We are not a new P2P finance blog spamming from various SPAs/IPs. We are the largest database for alternative investment opportunities, peer to peer lending sites and real estate crowdfunding platforms. There are 10+ platforms integrated with API displaying their live investments on the site. We are the only company providing a thorough overview of this market in terms of statistics with more than 35+ partners reporting statistics every month. Can we be whitelisted on Wikipedia again? Martin Schmidt Christensen (talk) 16:06, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You were never whitelisted. This site is blacklisted because you and several IP editors spammed it abusively. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:55, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

wikiwaparz.com

Recurring spam for a Nigerian download site. Deceptive overwriting of existing valid source links (for example: IP 105.112.39.67). Several warnings have been ignored. GermanJoe (talk) 07:57, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@GermanJoe: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (Help!) 20:57, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AlexMacArthur spam

Link spam. Anarchyte (talk | work) 15:32, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Anarchyte: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (Help!) 20:59, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

yupptv.com

yupptv.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

I think this is not a spam link. This is the official website of YuppTV. So, please coonsider it to remove from spam list.--Themanlk (talk) 01:35, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

bioexposed.com

Unreliable, spammy site for BLP information. The user's only edits are adding material sourced to this site. See also Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#bioexposed.com_as_a_source_in_a_BLP. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:30, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@LaundryPizza03: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (Help!) 21:38, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

beautytohealth.com

Site is featured on scholar.google.com but blacklisted on Wikipedia. The links do not exist on the website and seem to be added by competitors (negative SEO). Consider removing the blacklist. I tried adding genuine links but they keep getting auto removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2406:3400:30F:B9D0:74E2:58C:AAA4:944D (talk • contribs)

 Defer to Global blacklist Being "featured" on another site doesn't carry much weight here. Furthermore, it's not locally blacklisted, it's globally blacklisted due to extensive spamming. You'll have to take up the matter there (good luck, as I don't see how that site would meet WP:MEDRS. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:34, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I notice that your IP address geolocates to the the same Australian city as one of the IPs that previously spammed the site. Maybe a coincidence, but you may also want to read WP:COI. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:37, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We are in 2019 and IP addresses can be spoofed.

Thanks for that update. Good luck on your endeavors. I'll keep an eye out for requests on meta in case anyone needs further information.OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:58, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]