Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
 |
When reporting spam, please use the appropriate template(s):
|
As a courtesy, please consider informing other editors if their actions are being discussed.
Also, please include links ("diffs") to sample spam edits. |
| Indicators |
|---|
| Reports completed: |
 Done |
 Stale |
| Defer discussion: |
 Defer to XLinkBot |
| Defer to Local blacklist |
| Defer to Meta blacklist |
| Information: |
 Additional information needed |
 Note: |
[edit] sararamirez.com
sararamirez.com: Linksearch en - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Reports: Links on en - COIBot • Discussions: tracked - advanced • Meta: SRB-XWiki - COIBot-XWiki - Eagle's spam report search • Interwiki link search, big: 20 - 57 • Linkwatcher: search • Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • Veinor pages • meta • Yahoo: backlinks • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.org • DomainsDB.net • Alexa • OnSameHost.com • WhosOnMyServer.com
If a user follows the link, listed as the official site for Sara Ramírez, they will be redirected to a malicious website where a html exploit is used to install malicious code on the affected system. Site has numerous redirections to a well known trojan site. Number four on wiki guidelines, WP:LINKSTOAVOID. There is no business ADR DESIGN in New York City. [I do get a match for a Mr. Rodriguez, however at the same address and phone number/ http://www.aldrodriguez.com/site/index.htm] Moreover, this site doesn't seem to have any evidence of having contributions by the actress herself.
Couple of things to counter the McCafee assessment and redirections: The site is listed as the "official site" on IMDB, but with a clear disclaimer at the bottom. And, this is simply conjecture, but I don't think the domain owner's intent is for profit or malicious, he looks to be involved in the same profession and her "official site" does get consistent fan forum postings. The contact information for the actress is update and correct.
[edit] http use on this page
I understand the concerns of Lustiger seth and why he is removing the http tags from this page; but the use of an http link only causes an issue if the entry is added to the blacklist, and only a small percentage of entries at WT:WPSPAM are actually added to the blacklist. For the rest, the http actually serves a useful purpose. By having the link functional, it's many times easier to locate prior spam reportings of the link via Special:LinkSearch which will then turn up the links in the talk archives pages of WT:WPSPAM.
For the few cases where the entry does get added to the blacklist, it's easy enough to remove the http link at that time. Otherwise, the link eventually gets archived by MiszaBot - as archives shouldn't be edited, the link doesn't cause any problems at that point and are easily picked up by the LinkSearch.
Other opinions on this? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:09, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- Template:LinkSummary is a wonderful thing.. it provides all the research benefits of a regular http link, without the side effects should the URL be added to the blacklist. --Versageek 16:30, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- Though I've gotten into the habit of not using http here, I've been thinking of starting this same discussion for the same reasons given by Barek. The regular increase in spamming due to the holidays has me thankful that most spammers I encounter aren't very sophisticated in their approach. Though it hasn't happened often, http links in archived spam reports have been very helpful in tracking down the more sophisticated spammers. --Ronz (talk) 16:34, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
-
- To the best of my knowledge, that template is not a replacement. From the template, I've always used the links "en" and "20" - and they will only turn up results if the http tag was used in the link (same as using Special:LinkSearch). While both methods turn up where the links are currently in use, without the http link added to this page, it does not turn up prior reportings of the link. By removing the http tags, the prior reports in the archives of this talk page are effectively invisible to those tools. Or is there another way to use the template that I've missed? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:36, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- An example to illustrate the point:
- ecompetitors.com: Linksearch en - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Reports: Links on en - COIBot • Discussions: tracked - advanced • Meta: SRB-XWiki - COIBot-XWiki - Eagle's spam report search • Interwiki link search, big: 20 - 57 • Linkwatcher: search • Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • Veinor pages • meta • Yahoo: backlinks • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.org • DomainsDB.net • Alexa • OnSameHost.com • WhosOnMyServer.com
- From that template, I cannot see that the link was previously reported and the prior report is in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2008 Archive Dec 1. If the http tag had been on the entry, you would see that entry from the archives via either the template or the special page. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:46, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- Lustiger seth's removal of the http, is unessesary. The removals are under the presumption that having an existing hyperlink would trigger MediaWiki's software filters, however this is not the case for existing links, or cases where a link resides on a page prior to blacklisting. I recall this was an issue in the past, but MediaWiki's software was adjusted to fix this. Only new additions of a blacklisted URL triggers the spam filter (perhaps this is no longer the case?). I can't recall the links to where these previously discussed issues are, however there is not a need to edit others contributions.--Hu12 (talk) 19:05, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- An example to illustrate the point:
-
Hi!
You should not use links in titles of discussion thread, because you won't be able easily to place a link to a paragraph which consists of a blacklisted link (if the title of a thread is http://www.example.org and example.org will be blacklisted after that, it is forbidden to use the link Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#http://www.example.org). I've had that problem when trying to log a blacklist addition iirc.
Apart from that: How do your archive bots work here? When they move a thread that has a blacklisted link inside, the bot has to cope with the spam filter, because the bot seems to add a forbidden link (to the archive). -- seth (talk) 21:26, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- If this page were WP:SBL, then I would agree with you. But, as I mentioned above, only a fraction of the submittals here get blacklisted. For the handful that do get blacklisted, it's a fairly minor thing to change the thread to remove the link. The majority of entries here do not get blacklisted (they exist here primarilly for discussion and/or tracking purposes), there is no problem leaving them as links. And leaving them as links gives the advantage of making it more visible that it has been previously reported should the link ever turn up again (ie: if it gets reported again, it will turn up in a linksearch as existing in the archives - a sign that it's a recurring issue that may require a submittal to WP:SBL). I've found that the wiki's "Search" function isn't reliable for spotting those in the archives.
- Because the majority of entries here are not blacklisted, the bot has no problem archiving the entries.
- If you have a better tool for easily finding that a link has been reported once or more in the past (showing prior entries of the link in the archives), then this isn't an issue. Otherwise, removing the link makes it harder to spot if it has been a previously reported link that may pose an on-going/recurring problem. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 23:11, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hi!
- You can use the internal wiki search, e.g. search for "wallnia.com" prefix:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Spam. -- seth (talk) 17:32, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- As I stated above, "I've found that the wiki's "Search" function isn't reliable for spotting those in the archives."
- For the best shot at turning up the results, you need to insert the "prefix" tag to the search - otherwise you get many false positives. To be blunt, that's a pain in the arse to need to type or paste in each time - to me, it's more of a hassle than the fairly rare need to remove the http tags from this page.
- I suppose if the search were pre-formatted within the {{LinkSummary}} template to include the spam archive search, that would reduce my concerns as it's then one click and would eliminate the need to manually insert the needed search criteria. Otherwise, you're just trading one inconvenience for another. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:43, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- OK, I'll ask for that at Template talk:LinkSummary. -- seth (talk) 19:50, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- E.g. the Special:WhatLinksHere/Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/example.com does a wonderful trick in finding where the LinkSummary template is used to track a link ... It even works for non-existent COIBot reports (see Special:WhatLinksHere/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/sararamirez.com. No need for working link here in my opinion, but try to make sure there is a linksummary template. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:55, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
- So, should that link Special:WhatLinksHere/Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/example.com be added to the linksummary template? Or better http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&ns4=1&ns5=1&search=%22example.com%22&fulltext=Advanced+search ? -- seth (talk) 09:29, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe both, they have overlap, but e.g. the LinkSummary template is also used on some other discussion boards, which are silly to include all in the other search. On the other hand, sometimes the LinkSummary template is not suitable (e.g. for youtube.com/somespecificmovie-spammers, the template only makes sense with domains ..). --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
-
- Ok, so I guess, we should continue the discussion about the links on template talk:LinkSummary again. I made a proposal there including both links. If those links are added to the template, there wouldn't be any further need to use "http:", right? -- seth (talk) 20:18, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
-
-
- I agree; with those changes, "http" would no longer be needed. I also agree that Template talk:LinkSummary#modified proposal would be the place to continue this discussion to finalise the change (I added a link to point towards the updated proposal you've added). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
-
[edit] LinkSummary change makes http use not needed
The {{LinkSummary}} changes (adding a section for "Discussions: tracked - advanced") seems to adequately address the concerns that I had when I started this discussion. Thanks seth and Dirk Beetstra for finding a workable solution.
So ... unless anyone else still has a concern, I don't think there remains a need to use the actual http links directly on this page any longer. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:40, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
[edit] maselectromedicina.com
Adsense pub-4138084252125247
- maselectromedicina.com: Linksearch en - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Reports: Links on en - COIBot • Discussions: tracked - advanced • Meta: SRB-XWiki - COIBot-XWiki - Eagle's spam report search • Interwiki link search, big: 20 - 57 • Linkwatcher: search • Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • Veinor pages • meta • Yahoo: backlinks • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.org • DomainsDB.net • Alexa • OnSameHost.com • WhosOnMyServer.com
-
- surmedical.com: Linksearch en - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Reports: Links on en - COIBot • Discussions: tracked - advanced • Meta: SRB-XWiki - COIBot-XWiki - Eagle's spam report search • Interwiki link search, big: 20 - 57 • Linkwatcher: search • Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • Veinor pages • meta • Yahoo: backlinks • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.org • DomainsDB.net • Alexa • OnSameHost.com • WhosOnMyServer.com
- Accounts
190.135.196.198 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • search an, ani, cn, an3 • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google • AboutUs)
80.35.36.153 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • search an, ani, cn, an3 • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google • AboutUs)
190.135.146.2 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • search an, ani, cn, an3 • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google • AboutUs)
85.55.128.243 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • search an, ani, cn, an3 • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google • AboutUs)
190.133.140.41 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • search an, ani, cn, an3 • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google • AboutUs)
85.55.153.42 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • search an, ani, cn, an3 • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google • AboutUs)
85.55.147.50 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • search an, ani, cn, an3 • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google • AboutUs)
- Cross wiki Spamming
es:80.35.36.153
es:85.55.141.15
es:85.55.159.2
es:190.135.196.198
es:190.64.138.52
es:190.64.47.162
es:85.55.147.50
--Hu12 (talk) 19:41, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- Meta request made--Hu12 (talk) 19:56, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- continued spamming 190.135.148.253 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • search an, ani, cn, an3 • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google • AboutUs)
, BL'd locally--Hu12 (talk) 22:06, 31 December 2008 (UTC)- 190.135.27.137 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • search an, ani, cn, an3 • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google • AboutUs) - blanked this section of the page --Versageek 22:53, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
- Also made an attempt to remove the listing on meta --Hu12 (talk) 22:22, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
- 190.135.27.137 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • search an, ani, cn, an3 • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google • AboutUs) - blanked this section of the page --Versageek 22:53, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
- continued spamming 190.135.148.253 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • search an, ani, cn, an3 • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google • AboutUs)
[edit] 58.106.19.46 spams his site
58.106.19.46 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • search an, ani, cn, an3 • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google • AboutUs)