MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/February 2008

message: Was directed here from AN. All details can be derived from my initial posting at WP:AN.
I would appreciate inclusion of this link on the blacklist. User:Dorftrottel 10:03, January 18, 2008
: This could qualify as an attack site, however seems it references (and links to) Bio articles on Wikipedia about spreekillers. I've only been able to find 2 users editing;
:*
:
:Maby more info is needed?--Hu12 (talk) 23:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Untill more info is added, may want to --Hu12 (talk) 23:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: spreekillers.org

message: Spammer's contribs:
*Contribs (e.g.)
*Contribs (e.g.)
:Only one warning has been given (& template ones would be better) so this does not seem to warrant blacklisting at present unless there is continuing link placement - thanks  --Herby talk thyme 13:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: bannu.com

message: Several different accounts including IP editors keep adding yahoo group spam links to the Shane Diesel article, and other articles are using yahoo groups forum type sites for references, which do not qualify per WP:SPS
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*  —Preceding unsigned comment added by CrazyRob926 (talk • contribs) 21:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt even 1% of our Yahoo groups links meet either of our relevant guidelines (External Links or Reliable Sources) however we have over 5000 of these links. Blacklisting them would cause tremendous disruption until all the links were removed, a very labor-intensive process for somebody. Not only that but some of the several thousand editors that placed these links would get pretty annoyed unless we had gotten some community consensus to take this step first. I suggest possibly raising this at the Village Pump first. That, or if you just have specific subdomains you want blacklisted, we could blacklist just those subdomains. --A. B. (talk)  23:00, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Squelch it, I'd say. MER-C 07:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Since Myspace has been black listed I honestly thought doing the same to yahoo groups would be just as easy as a decision, but if that's not currently an option the address that keeps getting spammed on the article above is groups.yahoo.com/group/shanediesel CrazyRob926 (talk) 18:17, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: CrazyRob, I think it's a good idea but a big undertaking. In the meantime, I'll blacklist the subdomain. --A. B. (talk)  18:50, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  --A. B. (talk)  20:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree AB, but groups.yahoo.com needs to be done at some point. --Hu12 (talk) 20:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: groups.yahoo.com

message: *
*
Returning vanispamcruftiser, see WT:WPSPAM#Indian poetry vanispamcruftisement (again). MER-C 08:00, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: . added the third listed on WPSPAM also--Hu12 (talk) 20:38, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: More Indian poetry spam

message: ;Yuwie spam domains:
*
:*Now blacklisted
*
*
;Yuwie spam articles deleted multiple times:
*Yuwie Social Network -- deleted 2 times
*Yuwie signup -- deleted 2 times
*Yuwie -- deleted 6 times
*Yuwie.com -- deleted 5 times
;Yuwie-related accounts:
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
;Reference:
*MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/January 2008#Yuwie.com
--A. B. (talk)  21:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  --A. B. (talk)  21:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: More Yuwie.com spam on Wikipedia

message: Repeated additions to multiple articles by multiple IPs.  Examples can be found in linksearch results:
*   Deli nk (talk) 15:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes - not massive but enough to irritate!  Given the changing IPs I've  this one.  Thanks for catching it --Herby talk thyme 16:07, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: treatment-skincare.com

message: ;Spam tracking data:
*
*
*
Google Adsense: 7232663723163461
There may be related domains but I was unable to find them.
;Account:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
--A. B. (talk)  17:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  --A. B. (talk)  17:07, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: funarulez.com spam on Wikipedia

message: ;Spam domain summary:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
::Note: I did not have a chanced to look for related domains
;Accounts:
*
*
*
*
;Spam article:
*Http://www.alleurohotels.com/
--A. B. (talk)  20:49, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  --A. B. (talk)  20:54, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Turkish tourism spam

message: *
;Accounts:
*
*
Ronnotel (talk) 05:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: See also → Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Systematic_deletion_of_my_contributions_to_Wikipedia--Hu12 (talk) 05:08, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Logged this entry --Hu12 (talk) 14:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. Ronnotel (talk) 15:31, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Priory of Sion

message: ;Spam domain:
*
;Accounts:
*
*
;Pages deleted as spam:
*User:Aryavartjewelry1
*Aryavart Jewelry India
--A. B. (talk)  13:38, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  --A. B. (talk)  13:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Aryavart Impex spam

message: *
See WT:WPSPAM#spam.music-selector.blogspot.com. MER-C 07:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  --A. B. (talk)  08:08, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: music-selector.blogspot.com

message: :*
:*
:*
:*
:*
:*
:*
:Accounts
--Hu12 (talk) 15:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: --Hu12 (talk) 15:35, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moscow on The Hudson

message: :*
:*
Constantly being added through bogus user pages advertising some marketing scheme found by "Jay Kubassek" and "Mike Dillard". Ones I've found (now deleted) include:
*
*
*
*
*
--Calton | Talk 15:58, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Blocked the unblocked users.  I think these should be listed but out of time.  Removed one non existent user?? Cheers --Herby talk thyme 16:04, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Adding back Carboncopyscam, it had an errand "')" in the username, its been fixed ;)--Hu12 (talk) 16:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree also..--Hu12 (talk) 16:37, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Carbon Copy Pro spam

message: ::Accounts
 Long term....--Hu12 (talk) 16:20, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: More --Hu12 (talk) 13:50, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  journalreview.org

message: :*
:*
Both links point to same Google-ad site.  Frequently added to Graduate Record Examination from a number of anon IPs in the 203.187.208.* range: 
*
*
*
*
*
*
* OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:12, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: , thanks Ohnoitsjamie--Hu12 (talk) 20:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: testmax.webng.com

message: :Accounts
 recent activity see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2007_Archive_Sep#http:.2F.2Fspam.noooxml.org --Hu12 (talk) 19:54, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: --Hu12 (talk) 20:04, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  noooxml.org 

message: ;Spam domains:
*
*
*
*
*
*
Google Adsense ID: 1603406589185684
;Related domains:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
;Accounts:
*
*
*
*
*
;Reference:
*Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Spam only static IP 81.156.59.182 (permanent link)
--A. B. (talk)  01:03, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  --A. B. (talk)  01:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: colinjoss.com spam on Wikipedia

message: Hey everyone! I am really tired of removing Play Asia referral links. Users add them to articles like common "links", and then convert them to referral by exchanging it. Take , for example: his typo fix is actually converting a Play-Asia plain link (which in itself is spam) to a referral link (links that start with play-asia.com/SOap are referral, those starting with play-asia.com/paOS are plain ones). Since these referrals are easy to catch and are not unique (for any referral link to a page there is a plain link going there) I suggest blacklisting play-asia.com/SOap. There are many other referral sites as well, but these are easy to catch (not like Amazon ones). -- ReyBrujo (talk) 04:16, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The IP mentioned appears to have ceased - are there any others involved?  Thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Agree with this. Is play-asia.com/paOS the same? this link  →www.play-asia.com/SOap-23-83-r2q-71-43-77-c-15-tales+of-84-j-70-iuz.html redirects to →www.play-asia.com/paOS-13-71-43-77-c-49-en-15-tales+of-70-iuz.html..?--Hu12 (talk) 11:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Referral links for Play-Asia 

message: A new URL for the "Carbon Copy Pro" spammer
carboncopyproreview.wetpaint.com
--Calton | Talk 10:48, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Calton,  (reference )--Hu12 (talk) 12:09, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't the process supposed to be that we get to see a Spam Report and discuss it?  So we can not only all see the evidence, but that it can be preserved?  When I tried to review the above, I can't see anything odd.  It's all directed to empty reports.Wjhonson (talk) 16:50, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  The link to the previous case is above
Account from today.
*
*Sleeper acount  Adding two more missed in the previous report (jaykubassekcarboncopy1.wetpaint.com jaykubassekcarboncopypro.wetpaint.com) and closing. Calton if more comes (likely) please report it. --Hu12 (talk) 18:33, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Carbon Copy Pro 2

message: I was about to go to this external link provided on a Wikipedia article when my avast! anti-virius program picked up on this site sending a computer worm through my computer. While avast! stops it from harming my computer, I can't say the same for other editors of this site. If it wasn't for avast!, this worm would have been untraceable, for a while at least. — Save_Us † 18:00, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Urgently , we'll sort the rest later. thanks Save Us 229! Any way to post a log? thanks for alerting--Hu12 (talk) 18:37, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My avast! program deleted the temporary internet file instead of adding it to the virus 'chest' for a log, so I would have to visit the site to produce results again (and after I visited it last time the virus catching was so frequent I had to disconnect my network cable to stop the infection and restarted my computer). It is pretty vague but the last time I visited the site a year ago maybe and back then the content was fairly legitimate, but then again, my computer completely crashed from virus infection (I think I know why now >.>). — Save_Us † 18:49, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

text: And if you were wondering if I could get a log of the Malware or anything like that, all I know is that it was called a VBS:Malware-gen, a malicious visual basic script file, under the classification of worm/virus, and the name of the file. I wish avast! had more accurate logs, but thats all they gave me. — Save_Us † 22:19, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm inclined to leave this on untill more is determined.  this hasn't been logged yet.--Hu12 (talk) 22:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#VBS:Malware-gen_reported_on_100megsfree4.com also reported this to AN for input. --Hu12 (talk) 22:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know about you, but I got no infection.  I sandboxed Firefox to see what it did and nothing happened and I sandboxed Internet Explorer 7 and got nothing.  I looked at the HTML and couldn't find anything malicious.  x42bn6 Talk Mess 22:53, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Could it be an outdated version of avast!? Apparently on the 25th of January Avast decided to mark e-tracker code on websites as that virus. But that was fixed shortly thereafter. Agathoclea (talk) 23:34, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Yeah, apprently I'm a idiot with out-of-date software. :( Please, unblacklist it as a false positive. — Save_Us † 23:45, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a false positive. It's no longer listed. Always better to be safe than sorry. Thanks. --Hu12 (talk) 00:06, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Meh, still dont make feel any better about it, but I guess I did what I should have. — Save_Us † 00:10, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  have all the linkremovals been reverted? Agathoclea (talk) 09:26, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted myself and when I told someone else they started to remove them too, but after the false positive was reported, he reverted too. Not sure if there are any others. If so it is only one or two. — Save_Us † 15:29, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  www.100megsfree4.com - fairly urgent request

message: *
*
:Accounts
--Hu12 (talk) 21:02, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: thursdaysfictions.com 

message: Interesting proposition.
;Spam domains:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
;Related domains:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
;Accounts:
*
*
*
*
--A. B. (talk)  22:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: --A. B. (talk)  22:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: $5 for 10 submissions to Wikipedia

message: ;Accounts:
*
*
*
*
;Spam domains:
*
*
--A. B. (talk)  17:27, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: --A. B. (talk)  17:39, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: studentbeerpong.com

message: ;Domain:
*
;Deleted articles:
*Convenient Power
*Convenientpower
*Wireless power transfer
*Green electronic
;Accounts:
*
*
--A. B. (talk)  14:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: --A. B. (talk)  14:31, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: ConvenientPower (Hong Kong) spam

message: ;Accounts:
*
*
*
;Spam domains:
*
*
*
Google Adsense ID: 4938575759142349
--A. B. (talk)  14:48, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: --A. B. (talk)  14:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Playdesi spam

message: ;Domain:
*
;Account:
*
--A. B. (talk)  18:49, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: --A. B. (talk)  19:14, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Maestro Business Solutions spam

message: ;Domain:
*
;Account:
*
--A. B. (talk)  19:02, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: --A. B. (talk)  19:14, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Broward Flooring Specialists linkspam

message: This site was added to the blacklist under a presumption of being an "attack site" against a Wikipedian.  Whether or not that was at one time true, it is no longer true.  Sites which "clean up their act" may be removed from the blacklist.  Since this site is owned by a Wikipedian, there should be a presumption of good faith in this case, and it should be removed.  Thank you. Wjhonson (talk) 07:00, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: See here --Herby talk thyme 08:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No evidence is there *presented* which we can all independently judge.  Statements are made, and counter-statements are made, no evidence is shown.  The removal section is for the *removal* of sites previously blacklisted.  Removal not only covers the area of sites added by accident but also covers the removal of sites which have "cleaned up their act" as our policy states.  I dispute now, and have disputed since I was made aware of it, that this site was ever an "attack site" or a "harassment site" as the allegation, without evidence, was made.  The site was and is a criticism site.  The blacklist is not a place from which to silence opponents, silence dispute, or solve content issues related around sources.  That is not the proper use of this blacklist which was set-up for blocking spam sites.  Regardless of all of that, there is a cause for removing a previously blacklisted site, from the blacklist. A criticism site should never be blacklisted, criticism is the basis for democracy.  Without criticism we have censorship.  Wikipedia should never be put in the position of silencing dissent. Wjhonson (talk) 07:31, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *The author may have attempted to clean up his act a bit on his blacklisted site but he hasn't done so anywhere else.  See He continues to accuse the subject of a BLP and the subject of his web site of fraud citing other highly dubious sources that would never meet WP:RS policies.  The author's intent is clear.--Lazydown (talk) 20:12, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Off-wiki criticism does not have and should not have any bearing on blacklisting a site.  Whether a site's source meet out WP:RS policies does not have and should not have any bearing on blacklisting a site.  A site is blacklisted for a few narrow reasons.  This site did not, and does not, meet the criteria for blacklisting IMHO.  The blacklisting admin was an involved editor and in-fact was the original creator of the article. This at the very least gives an *appearance* of impropriety whether or not it actually is such a case.  Even if the site had at one time, for which no evidence was presented which we can all independently judge, it does not currently apparently.  Thus per our policy that "sites which clean up their act" can be removed, it should be removed from the blacklist. What the owner of the site does in other venues, has no bearing on this case.Wjhonson (talk) 21:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: unrealroyal.com

message: This and 4 related domains were blacklisted here in August 2007. After a request on  meta triggered further investigation, these domains plus 7 more related domains have been blacklisted on meta. I have removed what are now redundant entries here.
References:
*Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Aug#Data Shaping Solutions, LLC Spammer
*:meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#datashaping.com (permanent link)
 --A. B. (talk)  14:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: datashaping.com

message: I usually tell people I don't belive there's a big bias on this site. But when you censore a joke site like this I'm starting to get second thoughts. If anything the link should be allowed and creating articles about it not(?). IT IS A WIKI PROJECT, IT SHOULD BE LISTED UNDER WIKI PROJECTS! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.100.111.208 (talk • contribs) 15:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, let's weigh the potential for abuse (very high) against the potential that ED would be an encyclopedic link (close to zero, considering that Wikis are not considered reliable sources). In the event that a page of this site should be linked, we can add it to the whitelist. You should go to MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist and ask for a one-page exception, because there's no way this ought to be removed from the blacklist. Cool Hand Luke 15:15, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  This is blacklisted on Meta,  we can't help you.. --Versageek 22:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Agree, This needs to be   and closed--Hu12 (talk) 07:33, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: www.encyclopediadramatica.com/org

message: Why was this link blacklisted? It contains no spyware or malicious intent. It is free speech. It contains useful information for anyone who is passionate about the Arsenio Hall Show and would like to do something about it using the democratic process. It lived on the Arsenio Hall Show page as an "external link." Now it has been both removed and blacklisted. Would love an answer.
Thank you
Knyte77 (talk) 05:23, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please take a look at the specific requirements of our External Links and Reliable Sources guidelines. I don't think this link meets either guideline.--Hu12 (talk) 20:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Its not a resource about the subject, which is the purpose of the External links area. Its a petition and advocates a point of view, Wikipedia is not the medium for this. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for Propaganda, advocacy, or recruitment of any kind, commercial, political, religious, or otherwise.--Hu12 (talk) 12:50, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: www.petitiononline.com/njs4ever/petition.html

message: This domain was blacklisted awhile ago. I had mistakenly added some of my own domains, which I didn't at the time realize was against the rules. I now do, and I'm sorry for doing so. Anyway, this domain was blacklisted, which is unfair since it is not my site. I understand that my domains are blacklisted, I broke the rules, rules I didn't realize, but I still did. bowsershrine.com should not be blacklisted though. I did add it too the Bowser page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowser_%28Nintendo%29 because it has relevant content relating to that page. But I do not own or run that site, and the owner of it should not be punished for my mistake.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.64.112.59 (talk) 01:38, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: --A. B. (talk)  19:46, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: bowsershrine.com

message: I request that this page be removed from the blacklist.  I attempted to use this page as a reference in the article Ogden's Cavalry, but was prohibited from doing so because of the page being on the blacklist.  I must admit that I am not thoroughly familiar with what criteria puts a page on the list, but after looking the page over, I didn't notice anything offensive on it. Sf46 (talk) 00:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's blacklisted because of this AN thread. MER-C 01:48, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Based on the post by MER-C this is  on de-listing, but encourage you to  for requesting a single url for use as a reference.--Hu12 (talk) 01:57, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: www.famousamericans.net/fredericknashogden/

message: ==  == 
Problem with the blacklist:  I want to use the db-copyvio speedy deletion tag to get an article deleted.  The db-copyvio tag has as a parameter the url of the website which is being copied.  The website being copied is a blacklisted one, ezinearticles.  Oops, the spam filter kicks in.  This is bad.--Xyzzyplugh (talk) 19:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Try adding without the http:, the checking admin will copy & paste to check it.--Hu12 (talk) 19:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or don't provide the link in the db template, and add it below it (put  around). Or put it on my talk page and I'll have a look. -- lucasbfr talk 19:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Troubleshooting and problems 

message: Problem with the blacklist:  I want to use the db-copyvio speedy deletion tag to get an article deleted.  The db-copyvio tag has as a parameter the url of the website which is being copied.  The website being copied is a blacklisted one, ezinearticles.  Oops, the spam filter kicks in.  This is bad.--Xyzzyplugh (talk) 19:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Try adding without the http:, the checking admin will copy & paste to check it.--Hu12 (talk) 19:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or don't provide the link in the db template, and add it below it (put  around). Or put it on my talk page and I'll have a look. -- lucasbfr talk 19:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{tl|db-copyvio}} 

message: I'm new to dealing with this blacklist, so I hope that this is the right place to report my problem and ask for help. Anyway, I want to report the basic facts about Fred Ho's cancer, and the best source seems to be a primary source written by Ho (which I'm using, properly, for only basic facts, not opinion or interpretation). Unfortunately, this source is a blog on MySpace (the guy's a musician, after all), which is blacklisted. At first, I tried to get around this by removing the "http://", but that looked terrible (in the  template). So instead I made a TinyURL, but that's blacklisted too (and it wouldn't be a good long-term solution anyway). Then I considered abandoning  for a URL inside <nowiki>, but that doesn't work very nicely for the reader. Finally, I decided to link to non-blacklisted site that reprints the diary, but it doesn't seem to have an archive of back issues (so it's a decidely inferior resource). The diary (or some of it) is supposed to published as a book this year; but until then, what should I really be doing? (Note that I am an administrator, if that makes it easier for me to do things by myself.) —Toby Bartels (talk) 04:42, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Fred Ho]] 

message: Hello, I am a long-time contributor into wikepedia (well, maybe not that long...only about 4 months, but I am proud of my contributions!) and attempted a contribution into the article "Boricua Popular Army" but was blocked as I attempted the SAVE.   Wikipedia SAVE function complained that www.independencia.net was a spam site.  I verified that the article did contain (prior to my contribution) a link to the www.independencia.net site. 
www.independencia.net is the official website of a duly recogized political party in Puerto Rico.  That party has been one of the 3 major political parties there for over 50 years.  In surfing through the party's website I could not find anything that would violate wikipedia's policies.
I request that the www.independencia.net link be removed from the global spam blacklist.
Thanks.
Robruiz (talk) 01:51, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  www.independencia.net 

message: == No edit box in the Spam filter notice ==
Why does the "Spam filter notice" not contain an edit box? This necessitates pressing the back button which in IE (I'm reluctantly using it at the moment) means all edits are lost. There's a possible way around it, to open the article in a new tab, remove the spam link, save it, and then hit refresh in the "Spam filter notice" window to resubmit, but this is a hack and we shouldn't be inconveniencing innocent users like this. (Has happened to me twice already today, once I was adding a new section to a talk page and couldn't save because the existing talk page had a blacklisted link it... like wtf?!) --kingboyk (talk) 14:13, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion 

message: Why does the "Spam filter notice" not contain an edit box? This necessitates pressing the back button which in IE (I'm reluctantly using it at the moment) means all edits are lost. There's a possible way around it, to open the article in a new tab, remove the spam link, save it, and then hit refresh in the "Spam filter notice" window to resubmit, but this is a hack and we shouldn't be inconveniencing innocent users like this. (Has happened to me twice already today, once I was adding a new section to a talk page and couldn't save because the existing talk page had a blacklisted link it... like wtf?!) --kingboyk (talk) 14:13, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No edit box in the Spam filter notice 

message: Please see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SquelchBot if you have comments.  Thank you, Iamunknown 01:09, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A proposed bot ([[Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SquelchBot|SquelchBot]]) to automatically revert the addition of certain external links