Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Apr

message: See:
*Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Mar#Victoria2007 and NewsMax.com
*Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Mar#NewsMax.com spammer back
I notice we now have 635 newsmax.com links -- is this an increase from earlier this month? --A. B. (talk) 02:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can see no harm in linking to a reputable news site. WP probably has thousands of links to BBC.co.uk. The question is NewsMax.com a legit/reputable site? Are these links being added by lots of different users or  one user (and/or sockpupets)? - Just my two pence. -- Rehnn83 Talk 10:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The number of links is up by a couple of hundred. The issues for me are (1) it is a heavily advertised site (2) is seems to be a link campaign by users linked to the site  (3) reputation is marginal/second tier. --BozMo talk 10:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Given that the site has no special content and it has persistent sockpuppet linkspam campaigners I think we probably will end up having to blacklist it. --BozMo talk 15:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Basically if you wanted me to include a "top XYZ" list on the article entries for the list you would have to convince me the list itself was notable. Otherwise you my as well add "Joe Bloggs likes this band" to random articles. --BozMo talk 17:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bad analogy. I am not including some blog list...comeon! And as mentioned, in the radio industry, ratings is everything, and Newsmax does carry a respect and following in the journalistic community. It is still POV to remove the entries as Femto has. He is the one who has to do the selling, not me. --Maniwar (talk) 18:10, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "respect and following in the journalistic community"... not what I heard... anyway if true establishing notability for this list should be a piece of cake? --BozMo talk 19:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: See above, there is sufficient evidence that the Art2006 account added these links in violation of Wikipedia's neutrality policy. As I already told you, I have no idea why or why not this list would be relevant to some 20 articles. I just removed the entries as the spam that they were. Accusing me of POV for this is just silly. So we're back to square one, and since the notability seems disputed, any good editor who wants to include this content should establish consensus first. Femto 21:24, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Femto 1) You did not tell me that that you didn't see relevance, however, specifically speaking of the Boortz article, we explained the relevance in it as well as above in this string. 2) You reverted the Boortz entry when this Art2006 person did not even make the entry, so yes, you're rv. was in fact POV. 3) You are one person saying that it is not relevant, however, clearly the consensus and authors quickly reverted your edit to the Boortz entry. In all fairness, if you found that Art2006 is spamming, then you should only focus on his entries and not venture into articles where he did not even make an entry. Then again, as I originally pointed out, it could have been some passerby, who saw the list and wanted to add to the names listed in the article. I thought of it, not as a spam thing, but as additional info for the talk radio circuit. Anyway, think about that next time before reverting someone other than the suspected spammer. --Maniwar (talk) 18:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

text: 1) Talk:Neal Boortz#newsmax.com - I assumed that if you replied to my comment, you read it. 2) - Um...  ? 3) What exactly is the remaining point? Femto 19:10, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For the record, I added that stat, but it somehow got changed or didn't take. Bygons! --Maniwar (talk) 17:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I've just blocked  one week for continuing the spam. Femto 19:36, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  newsmax.com links 

message: :Spam sock accounts
:Other sites spammed
Adsense pub-3733360336386994 
http://www.colonoscopy-prep.com 
*
http://www.37minutes.com 
*--Hu12 20:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Colonoscopy and dance howto sites by the same spammer seems really odd.  I noticed that User_talk:220.239.174.39 has added multiple external spam links to http://www.thecwalker.com which lists NS1.FUNKSTYLER.COM as a domain server. All the links to   are cleaned, not sure who did it, but I thought I should mention yet another link. (Requestion 22:16, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  http://www.funkstyler.com and related 

message: :Spam sock accounts
--Hu12 23:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I received this from one of the most recent IP address adding the links.  Just FYI. -- Siobhan Hansa 16:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  http://www.antonkisieldesigns.com 

message: The External Links section becomes excessive list of professional photographer list. I've tried to clean them but I got resistance by the editor. Can anybody weighing in the discussion here? Thanks. — Indon (reply) — 16:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Underwater photography]] 

message: The company Scriptlogic has been spamming Wikipedia since October 2005. See also MaSaI_Solutions. In total about about 35 external links have been added.
* Special:Linksearch/*.scriptlogic.com
socks
*  whois reports an owner of Scriptlogic, diffs         
* 
* 
* 
*  created the Scriptlogic page and has blanked their talk page twice
*  created 3 Scriptlogic products stubs that were RfD'd
The 4 spam warnings were issued and the final warning was violated multiple times.  This persistent link has become very troublesome. I recommend blacklisting of the scriptlogic.com domain and I recommend deletion of the promotional and non-notable Scriptlogic and MaSaI_Solutions articles. (Requestion 21:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added several diffs for easier verification to the 65.248.131.254 IP address because many of those spam edits are buried amongst good edits. (Requestion 17:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [http://spam.scriptlogic.com scriptlogic.com] 

message: Many of the proxies on internet which can be used to get around the spam blacklisting on meta or on shadowbot use IP-numbers.  Also, all pages accessable via the domain-name can also be accessed via the IP-number, which makes blacklisting double task.  A simple and quick solution would be to meta-blacklist all IP numbers.  But before that can be done, we might need to make an inventory if there are (many?) IP numbers which cannot be circumvented.  I will put Google here, which can (and should) be circumvented).  Does anyone know of others that might cause problems, or other reasons why IPs should not be banned?  --Dirk Beetstra T C 22:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Should the main discussion take place at meta, since this would affect all wikis? Or maybe WP:EL since a prohibition of IP links would also be covered there. I think it's generally a good idea, having seen someone trying to sneak their blacklisted links back in through an IP myself. Sounds like a lot of cleanup work though; I'm currently counting 5652 links referenced by their IP address on the en:wiki. Femto 12:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisting IP addresses. 

message: # Google cache.  Google cache pages make use of an IP, but when loading the google cache (e.g. a cached page of the wikiproject spam, it shows in the header "To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:evl_msrvjhQJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam+wikiproject+spam&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&client=opera".  --Dirk Beetstra T C 22:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible problems with IP blacklisting

message: Both  and  are ways to bypass the blacklist. I've been told both of these sites are blacklisted but I keep seeing them pop up. Plenty of hits from both with linksearch. (Requestion 22:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Citebite is currently not blacklisted, becuase it is being used for the greater good atm. (the site saves a copy of the page that you re-direct to, therefore it is good for saving copies of newspapers ect, that don't up long enough, and are not archived by any of the major archive services. If that situation changes, it will be blacklisted. Tinyurl should be blacklisted. —— Eagle101 Need help? 02:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Are you sure citebite.com works like that? I was under the impression that it is a mashup variation of tinyurl.com with the addition of #anchor names and yellow highlighting. Citebite.com even has obfuscated URL's just like tinyurl.com. (Requestion 17:43, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect/cache sites

message: Adsense pub-9360421559178622
:Spam sock accounts
Over 127 links were added by the namesake Gfmer(gfmer.ch) and his/her IP. These additions have been removed per WP:SPAM, WP:EL and WP:COI, but watch for future resurgence.--Hu12 02:01, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes there is many links on other wikis, see WP:WPSPAM/CrossWiki. I'm currently busy with other stuff, so if someone wants to go through and verify that those have not been spammed recently feel free. —— Eagle101 Need help? 20:34, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medical Spam gfmer.ch 

message: Affected articles (English language Wikipedia only):
*Berlin, New Hampshire
*Capilene
*Clothing terminology
*Combustion
*Covered bridge
*Crawford Notch
*Debris shelter
*Dorn
*Esperanto
*Filter (water)
*Fire
*Fire classes
*Fire extinguisher
*Fire triangle
*Fossil
*Four-thousand footers
*Hypothermia
*Imp Mountain
*Insect repellent
*Jerky (food)
*Meal, Ready-to-Eat
*New Hampshire
*Nuclear warfare
*Pemmican
*Presidential Range
*Red Adair
*Sea kayak
*Search and rescue
*Sleeping bag
*Solar water disinfection
*Survival kit
*Survival knife
*Survival skills
*Survivalism
*Ten Essentials
*Urban warfare
*Water
*White Mountain National Forest
*White Mountains (New Hampshire)
*White Mountains Region
*Wildfire
Linking data:
*www.whitemountainsworld.com
**[ List] of pages with these links
*www.survivaltopics.com
**[ List] of pages with these links
*esperantio.com
**[ List] of pages with these links on en.wikipedia
**List  of pages with these links on eo.wikipedia
**List  of pages with these links on el.wikipedia
**List  of pages with these links on et.wikipedia 
*www.epaleo.com
**[ List] of pages with these links
*www.northernforestcanoetrail.com
**[ List] of pages with these links
*www.americandiscoverytrail.org
**[ List] of pages with these links
Adsense ID: 5726122914499591
Accounts adding these links:
*RobertRogers (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status) previously warned
*Rfontaine (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
*69.205.8.94 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search) Blocked 
*69.24.8.179 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search) previously warned
*68.169.217.62 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search) many of these edits were actually link deletions
*68.169.221.230 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search) previously blocked
--A. B. (talk) 18:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Blacklisted on meta —— Eagle101 Need help? 20:26, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  whitemountainsworld.com, esperantio.com and survivaltopics.com  

message: Adsense pub-2757884200825666
:Spam sock accounts
--Hu12 20:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  http://www.quantcode.com 

message: famousamericans.net is being spammed to articles about figures and events in American history and it appears that someone bought up domains with names of famous Americans.. and redirected them to this site..  http://www.jamesmonroe.net/  is one example.
Spamming in the last 24hrs has been done by Special:Contributions/24.94.139.230, There are over 500 mainspace links to famousamericans.net alone, this doesn't include all of the other domains that redirect there. --Versageek 04:28, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just a note, User:MichaelBillington beat me and has reverted all the links added by that IP. —— Eagle101 Need help? 04:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  www.famousamericans.net & related 

message: Both of these domains are owned by a "Ben Volkow." Over the past 2+ months about 25 external links have been added.
* Special:Linksearch/*.traffixsystems.com
* Special:Linksearch/*.open3gpp.org
socks
* 
* 
* 
* 
The 4 spam warnings were issued and the final warning was violated.  I recommend blacklisting. (Requestion 21:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have filed an RFCU request at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/3GPP guru. Based on results there, hopefully all four of these accounts can be blocked as well. -- Satori Son 21:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Looks like the checkuser request was declined but that isn't much of a loss. A whois on the two domains reports an owner of "Benjamin Volkow" with either a physical address or a DNS nameserver in Israel. A whois on the three IP sock addresses also resolves to Israel.  So that pretty much pinpoints the source. The only unknown is the User:3GPP_guru but spamming behavior looks identical. (Requestion 22:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [http://spam.traffixsystems.com traffixsystems.com] and [http://spam.open3gpp.org open3gpp.org] 

message: The external links section is loaded with sites not related to the books, I placed a "linkfarm" tag on there 2 months ago but non-specific links are still being added, mostly to promote "similar" games/projects. I'm not sure what to remove. 172.202.30.200 19:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The user who removed the tag actually reverted links back in that had been removed back into the article citing competition concerns  .  S/He doesn't seem like an unreasonable editor so I've put a proposal to cut the links more drastically on the talk page and asked him/her to comment.  Hopefully we can get a good consensus that will be in line with having a good encyclopedia article.  -- Siobhan Hansa 00:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could someone take a look at [[Choose Your Own Adventure]]? 

message: agloco.com is the current "hot" affiliate marketing scheme:
*mccallsnotes.live.spaces
*agloco.com
*aglocotest.com
*johnchow.com
*wegetpaidtosurf.com
These links have been recently added by a number of unrelated editors. This is just the tip of the iceberg":
*192.249.47.8 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
**shared IP -- most of the edits are not by an agloco spammer
*202.164.198.115 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
*70.50.235.7 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
*Amahdigital (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
*Glomage (talk • contribs • links • site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
*Glomage (talk • contribs • links • site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
*Librahitech (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
*RAKESHPPANDYA (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
In some cases, they were deleting others' referral codes and adding their own.
Blacklisting requested. --A. B. (talk) 20:07, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  agloco.com spam 

message: Please look at contributions for this anon IP. All sites appear to be hosted by a common provider {MONIKER ONLINE SERVICES, INC.)
Sites spammed:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
RJASE1  Talk  02:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Suggested to Shadowbot's blacklist (User:Shadowbot/Blacklist requests). Femto 11:37, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adult site spamming from a common provider 

message: Both of these domains are owned by a "Ben Volkow." Over the past 2+ months about 25 external links have been added.
* Special:Linksearch/*.traffixsystems.com
* Special:Linksearch/*.open3gpp.org
socks
* 
* 
* 
* 
The 4 spam warnings were issued and the final warning was violated.  I recommend blacklisting. (Requestion 21:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have filed an RFCU request at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/3GPP guru. Based on results there, hopefully all four of these accounts can be blocked as well. -- Satori Son 21:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Looks like the checkuser request was declined but that isn't much of a loss. A whois on the two domains reports an owner of "Benjamin Volkow" with either a physical address or a DNS nameserver in Israel. A whois on the three IP sock addresses also resolves to Israel.  So that pretty much pinpoints the source. The only unknown is the User:3GPP_guru but spamming behavior looks identical. (Requestion 22:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [http://spam.traffixsystems.com traffixsystems.com] and [http://spam.open3gpp.org open3gpp.org] 

message: I'm a relative newbie, having edited only since Christmas, so would welcome some guidance on this matter.  What is WP policy on mentioning local sports clubs by name in articles on towns or regions?  One editor working on Mendip Hills unlinked a (named) local gliding club, leaving a link to gliding as a sport in the text & relegating the club to an External Link.  Is this the generally approved method; or is it sometimes acceptable to mention a specific (non-profit members') club in the text of the article? --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 09:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Links within the body of the article should be wikilinks (or inter:wikilinks to other wikimedia projects like wiktionary) or citations backing up an assertion.  If it was just an external link to the gliding club's home page, that does more properly sit in the external links section (if it's agreed it's an appropriate link for the article).  This used to me quite explicitly stated in the external links guidelines though it's recently come up on the talk page that it dropped out during various changes.  The nonprofit status of the club isn't really relevant to whether or not the link is appropriate.  Sorry it took so long to respond.  Sometimes the questions that aren't very action oriented towards stopping spam get a bit lost.  -- Siobhan Hansa 03:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Many thanks for your response.  In the meantime I've had a reply very much along the same lines from the Help Desk.  In the article on Mendip Hills it certainly seemed relevant to mention the sport of gliding in general, leaving an EL to the club's website for those interested in following it up.  I've done the same with Aston Down.  Thanks again. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 10:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links to local sports clubs 

message: I've just come across an IP (70.92.121.114) systematically adding links to tolkiengateway.net, a Tolkien focused wiki.  A bit of further investigation indicates that the wiki seems to have at least one proponent on Wikipedia who does nothing here other than promote this other wiki (Hyarion) and that the articles seem to have significant content taken from Wikipedia without attribution. For instance, found using their random page feature, Their Rohan article, started on 2005-10-27 and our Rohan article from 2005-10-19, after the lead the articles are virtually identical.  All the articles I found for which we have an article were similar.  I could find no attribution to Wikipedia or link back to the original articles for the purposes of identifying the copyright holders).  The wiki obviously does go into more depth than Wikipedia does (or should!).  I think this link has been spammed, and that a site that violates Wikipedian copyrights shouldn't be linked to, but they seem to have been around for sometime without upsetting Wikipedia:WikiProject_Middle-earth.  I'd like other opinions before I do the standard strip out links.  I'll leave a message at WikiProject_Middle-earth soliciting their input here.  -- Siobhan Hansa 19:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't belong to the project but I've edited a number of Tolkien articles and would tend to agree that this is spam. Besides, its inclusion might tempt some editors to use it as a source, which is clearly improper. TCC (talk) (contribs) 23:25, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Not sure what to say here. I've been aware for some time that their articles appear to have been seeded by using our articles, but I assumed they had attributed Wikipedia as the source of the original material. They can indeed go into more depth, particularly on the fan side of things, but ultimately it would be good to see a synergy form between that wiki (which does seem very popular) and the pages here. How is this sort of things handled with, say, the Star Trek and Star Wars wikis? Carcharoth 00:21, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for responding Carcharoth.  If regular editors of the article think a relationship with this wiki can benefit Wikipedia we should probably tackle this in a different manner.  Do you know any editors who are involved with both wikis?  Would it be better to move this discussion to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Middle-earth?  Thanks -- Siobhan Hansa 00:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure. I've considered getting inolved over there, but there are only so many hours in a day! You've left messages in the right places. Hyarion might take a while to respond. I might drop a note over at that wiki if I have time. I think just wait and see for a bit. I think what would be useful is to lay down some ground rules and distinguish the different styles. Wikipedia is general, the subject-specific wikis are, well, more detailed. For what it is worth, Hyarion is also active at http://tolkiennews.net/, a Tolkien news site. At the end of the day, if our articles are referenced properly (and sadly many aren't), then there is no need to link to other Tolkien wikis or sites like The Encyclopedia of Arda. At the end of the day, places like the Tolkien Gateway will be able to do more with things like fan artwork, and content listings for fan magazines, and so forth, stuff that would never be suitable for Wikipedia. Wikipedia can take a more serious approach, and can concentrate on referencing the articles in a more encyclopedic manner. Also, the linking out to other articles works differently. Joseph Wright (linguist) (someone who taught Tolkien at university), for example, on the Tolkien Gateway would never be its own article, but here we can link to things like that. Carcharoth 01:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello everyone! I must say, I was rather shocked when I saw "Tolkien Gateway" and "spam "in the same sentence, but I suppose if I plan on adding external links I should focus more on improving the article by other means as well, though I still stand behind the links I added and do not believe they should be classified as spam. But by all means, if you feel they are not helpful, please remove them and you won't see anymore of them. I think the main issue here is not the spam but some of the articles on TG that are a bit too similar to Wikipedia's. I will be the first to admit that when I added them I did so without fully understanding the GNU FDL and did not realize a return link had to be added or I would have gladly done so. We were using them as placeholders but I had hoped we would have replaced them at a faster pace than present so we will be adding adding the Wikipedia notices to the articles until we can rewrite them, this is something which is being addressed at our next meeting. I agree with Carcharoth in that the best approach is making sure each wiki has their own benefits as well as downsides. For instance with Joseph Wright, we do have articles such as that but have no need to include information not related to Tolkien, which is where Wikipedia comes in. I'll monitor this discussion and if I can be of anymore help please let me know, and thanks for your time. --Hyarion 03:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for responding.  I appreciate your intention is to make good content freely available, and it would be great if that could improve Wikipedia as well as Tolkiengateway!  Since there seems to be some respect for this external wiki by at least one editor who spends significant time on the related articles I don't think a spam label is appropriate.  However I am concerned about the linking to articles that are mainly repeats of Wikipedia material and about the use of content from Wikipedia without attribution.  I'll go through the links and remove the ones to articles that don't have significant new content, and I'll bring up the copyright issue at WikiProject Middle-earth (where they should be better placed to decide on appropriate monitoring or action since more editors whose copyright has technically been violated are likely to be there).  Let me know if this doesn't seem reasonable.  -- Siobhan Hansa 20:05, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds about right. —— Eagle101 Need help? 20:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  tolkiengateway.net 

message: The external links section is loaded with sites not related to the books, I placed a "linkfarm" tag on there 2 months ago but non-specific links are still being added, mostly to promote "similar" games/projects. I'm not sure what to remove. 172.202.30.200 19:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The user who removed the tag actually reverted links back in that had been removed back into the article citing competition concerns  .  S/He doesn't seem like an unreasonable editor so I've put a proposal to cut the links more drastically on the talk page and asked him/her to comment.  Hopefully we can get a good consensus that will be in line with having a good encyclopedia article.  -- Siobhan Hansa 00:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could someone take a look at [[Choose Your Own Adventure]]? 

message: agloco.com is the current "hot" affiliate marketing scheme:
*mccallsnotes.live.spaces
*agloco.com
*aglocotest.com
*johnchow.com
*wegetpaidtosurf.com
These links have been recently added by a number of unrelated editors. This is just the tip of the iceberg":
*192.249.47.8 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
**shared IP -- most of the edits are not by an agloco spammer
*202.164.198.115 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
*70.50.235.7 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
*Amahdigital (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
*Glomage (talk • contribs • links • site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
*Glomage (talk • contribs • links • site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
*Librahitech (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
*RAKESHPPANDYA (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
In some cases, they were deleting others' referral codes and adding their own.
Blacklisting requested. --A. B. (talk) 20:07, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  agloco.com spam 

message: I like to cruise our archives every so often, just following up with linksearches on old problems. Here are a few worth noting:
#Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Mar#naxos.com/composerinfo
#:Looks like we now have 200+ links, up from 35
#Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Mar#News aggregate spam
#:21 links -- is that an increase?
#Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Mar#thepalestra.com
#:New account: 
#Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Mar#www.pressarchive.net -- still have about 120 blacklisted links in the article space
#:These will be real aggravation for regular editors trying to save a page.
I won't have time to work on any of these for several days. --A. B. (talk) 00:12, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've converted all the pressarchive.net links to moviehole links per Eagle101's suggestion. -- Siobhan Hansa 13:50, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I just took a look at the naxos links.  I went through the first hundred and only a few of the pages had had the linked added since February 28th (when the report with the 35 links was made).  There must have been something wrong with the link search.  Of the ones I checked, all the added links were good faith and appropriate.  However the accounts that spammed the link back at the time of the report (; ; ; ) have added more links since then.  I've stripped those links out.  Looks like this one will be a hard one to monitor as the site is used as a reliable source for a lot of classical musicians' articles.  -- Siobhan Hansa 05:57, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Looking at the March archives 

message: Please look at contributions for this anon IP. All sites appear to be hosted by a common provider {MONIKER ONLINE SERVICES, INC.)
Sites spammed:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
RJASE1  Talk  02:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Suggested to Shadowbot's blacklist (User:Shadowbot/Blacklist requests). Femto 11:37, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adult site spamming from a common provider 

message: You guys might want to have a look at this, and keep an eye out for it. Its not inserting links, but its intended to insert links. (it sometimes puts <a href=" and thats it). I'm seeing it very often on #wikimedia-swmt (small wiki monitoring team), and I don't know if it will come to the english wikipedia or not. A link about this bot can be found here. Again, we really don't have much we can do, short of getting something like antivandalbot on it. —— Eagle101 Need help? 02:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I found out that a large number of times bots create articles that have titles with /w/, /wiki/, index.php or ending with / (slash). I have found them in most (if not all) the wikis I have cleaned (including big  ones like this one). Some examples are at ie:Wikipedia:Protected titles. -- ReyBrujo 03:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiple wiki "malfunctioning" spam bot 

message: someone please check this fellow (Special:Contributions/Theophilus_Grantly. i'd do more but im at work, sorry! JoeSmack Talk 17:56, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The link addition is www.anthonytrollope.com, and I have dropped a warning by. —— Eagle101 Need help? 18:58, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Special:Contributions/Theophilus_Grantly]] 

message: About 50 linkspams added today .  Thanks.  --CliffC 18:56, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Reverted and dealt with. —— Eagle101 Need help? 19:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  www.artfacts.net spammer - can some admin roll him back please? 

message: Added about 27 times by . This is a new link (it has not showed up before, see insearchofheaven.com archive searchI have warned. —— Eagle101 Need help? 19:27, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  www.insearchofheaven.com 

message: socks
* 
* 
* 
search links
*webcast.challengeyoursoul.comarchive search
*www.boosttown.com archive search
Are the added links. User has a history of adding links see user contribs. —— Eagle101 Need help? 19:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: User added a boosttown.com link after your final warning, he got a 24hr time out.--Hu12 02:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The webcast. prefix made your tool miss an IP addr I link tagged. A Special:Linksearch/*.challengeyoursoul.com can see it. No big deal but it might be useful if your archive search tool did some smart stripping of domain prefixes. I tend to add tags in the form of  so if a www. is specified then both the linksearch and your tool will miss it. It is interesting that all 3 IPs and challengeyoursoul.com all resolve to Denmark with a whois. (Requestion 21:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{user|85.82.197.144}} 

message: See this. The new tool allows searching across multiple wikis with one click. Hope this help you all! Think of it as an improved linksearch. :) —— Eagle101 Need help? 04:46, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do note this is different then the prior tool. :) —— Eagle101 Need help? 05:56, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New tool, again :) 

message: Hi,  The guys over at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rugby_union#Link_spam have spotted that a user itsrugby has been adding links to itsrugby.com Could someone remove them with VandalProof or similar?  I don't have the tool.  Thanks Nelson50 12:30, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  itsrugby 

message: User account has been active since January. The first article created was Norris-Whitney Communications, and all creations and edits since seem to be for publications, people, and events connected with this particular company. I think I'll also post something at the COI noticeboard. RJASE1  Talk  15:52, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{userlinks|Norcomm}} 

message: Seems like a great cause, but they spammed & were warned/reverted last week. Now they are at it again this week.. current count is 27 and climbing. current ID's are:
*
*
--Versageek 00:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  endexploitation.org 

message: This was spammed across 4 wikis, just one entry on each:  en (1), nl (1), pt (1), da (1).
He registered users on all four wiki's.. on en the user was: 
* 
I'm not sure if his intent is to run up the hits on the domain, or actually provide tax advice - but with text like this, perhaps he should stick to domain-parking:  When Time of Father goes in, the question of what to do with the home comes be a larger one concerns. At times, ruminating in the alternatives can dominate a thought. If a person is aware of the several options and he chooses a path that removes the major party the sense, the tranquility often can be the result.   I reverted it on all 4 wiki's.. --Versageek 07:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  all-taxquestions.com 

message: This site contains quotes and google ads (not necessarily in that order).. there is a COI issue - the links were posted by:
*    
It says right on the site: Powered by: Omnem, Talad, Bruce.
The site also mentions these four other domains, which don't appear to have been spammed. (yet).
*Special:Linksearch/*.cyberdunk.com
*Special:Linksearch/*.talkdep.com
*Special:Linksearch/*.lastsmoke.info
*Special:Linksearch/*.buylib.com
--Versageek 08:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  focusdep.com 

message: On my rounds doing work for :WP:ALBUM, I obviously come across a lot of spam articles and links – which I delete with mucho gusto! The latest article I came across was :List of post-rock bands which consisted of a lot of entries with an external link rather than a link to a Wikipedia article. Here's what I cleared on the first sweep. Just a heads up for this project, really, that this sort of list article (although mainly used correctly) is a breeding ground for spam, which, as I say, I will continue to clean up as soon as I see it. Bubba hotep 08:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spam link removal from band "lists" 

message: Promotional links posted by:
*
Sites mentioned:
clusterpulse.org 
globaljagat.com     --Versageek 08:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  clusterpulse.org (COI) 

message: famousamericans.net is being spammed to articles about figures and events in American history and it appears that someone bought up domains with names of famous Americans.. and redirected them to this site..  http://www.jamesmonroe.net/  is one example.
Spamming in the last 24hrs has been done by Special:Contributions/24.94.139.230, There are over 500 mainspace links to famousamericans.net alone, this doesn't include all of the other domains that redirect there. --Versageek 04:28, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just a note, User:MichaelBillington beat me and has reverted all the links added by that IP. —— Eagle101 Need help? 04:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  www.famousamericans.net & related 

message: Both of these domains are owned by a "Ben Volkow." Over the past 2+ months about 25 external links have been added.
* Special:Linksearch/*.traffixsystems.com
* Special:Linksearch/*.open3gpp.org
socks
* 
* 
* 
* 
The 4 spam warnings were issued and the final warning was violated.  I recommend blacklisting. (Requestion 21:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have filed an RFCU request at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/3GPP guru. Based on results there, hopefully all four of these accounts can be blocked as well. -- Satori Son 21:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Looks like the checkuser request was declined but that isn't much of a loss. A whois on the two domains reports an owner of "Benjamin Volkow" with either a physical address or a DNS nameserver in Israel. A whois on the three IP sock addresses also resolves to Israel.  So that pretty much pinpoints the source. The only unknown is the User:3GPP_guru but spamming behavior looks identical. (Requestion 22:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [http://spam.traffixsystems.com traffixsystems.com] and [http://spam.open3gpp.org open3gpp.org] 

message: I'm a relative newbie, having edited only since Christmas, so would welcome some guidance on this matter.  What is WP policy on mentioning local sports clubs by name in articles on towns or regions?  One editor working on Mendip Hills unlinked a (named) local gliding club, leaving a link to gliding as a sport in the text & relegating the club to an External Link.  Is this the generally approved method; or is it sometimes acceptable to mention a specific (non-profit members') club in the text of the article? --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 09:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Links within the body of the article should be wikilinks (or inter:wikilinks to other wikimedia projects like wiktionary) or citations backing up an assertion.  If it was just an external link to the gliding club's home page, that does more properly sit in the external links section (if it's agreed it's an appropriate link for the article).  This used to me quite explicitly stated in the external links guidelines though it's recently come up on the talk page that it dropped out during various changes.  The nonprofit status of the club isn't really relevant to whether or not the link is appropriate.  Sorry it took so long to respond.  Sometimes the questions that aren't very action oriented towards stopping spam get a bit lost.  -- Siobhan Hansa 03:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Many thanks for your response.  In the meantime I've had a reply very much along the same lines from the Help Desk.  In the article on Mendip Hills it certainly seemed relevant to mention the sport of gliding in general, leaving an EL to the club's website for those interested in following it up.  I've done the same with Aston Down.  Thanks again. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 10:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links to local sports clubs 

message: I've just come across an IP (70.92.121.114) systematically adding links to tolkiengateway.net, a Tolkien focused wiki.  A bit of further investigation indicates that the wiki seems to have at least one proponent on Wikipedia who does nothing here other than promote this other wiki (Hyarion) and that the articles seem to have significant content taken from Wikipedia without attribution. For instance, found using their random page feature, Their Rohan article, started on 2005-10-27 and our Rohan article from 2005-10-19, after the lead the articles are virtually identical.  All the articles I found for which we have an article were similar.  I could find no attribution to Wikipedia or link back to the original articles for the purposes of identifying the copyright holders).  The wiki obviously does go into more depth than Wikipedia does (or should!).  I think this link has been spammed, and that a site that violates Wikipedian copyrights shouldn't be linked to, but they seem to have been around for sometime without upsetting Wikipedia:WikiProject_Middle-earth.  I'd like other opinions before I do the standard strip out links.  I'll leave a message at WikiProject_Middle-earth soliciting their input here.  -- Siobhan Hansa 19:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't belong to the project but I've edited a number of Tolkien articles and would tend to agree that this is spam. Besides, its inclusion might tempt some editors to use it as a source, which is clearly improper. TCC (talk) (contribs) 23:25, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Not sure what to say here. I've been aware for some time that their articles appear to have been seeded by using our articles, but I assumed they had attributed Wikipedia as the source of the original material. They can indeed go into more depth, particularly on the fan side of things, but ultimately it would be good to see a synergy form between that wiki (which does seem very popular) and the pages here. How is this sort of things handled with, say, the Star Trek and Star Wars wikis? Carcharoth 00:21, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for responding Carcharoth.  If regular editors of the article think a relationship with this wiki can benefit Wikipedia we should probably tackle this in a different manner.  Do you know any editors who are involved with both wikis?  Would it be better to move this discussion to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Middle-earth?  Thanks -- Siobhan Hansa 00:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure. I've considered getting inolved over there, but there are only so many hours in a day! You've left messages in the right places. Hyarion might take a while to respond. I might drop a note over at that wiki if I have time. I think just wait and see for a bit. I think what would be useful is to lay down some ground rules and distinguish the different styles. Wikipedia is general, the subject-specific wikis are, well, more detailed. For what it is worth, Hyarion is also active at http://tolkiennews.net/, a Tolkien news site. At the end of the day, if our articles are referenced properly (and sadly many aren't), then there is no need to link to other Tolkien wikis or sites like The Encyclopedia of Arda. At the end of the day, places like the Tolkien Gateway will be able to do more with things like fan artwork, and content listings for fan magazines, and so forth, stuff that would never be suitable for Wikipedia. Wikipedia can take a more serious approach, and can concentrate on referencing the articles in a more encyclopedic manner. Also, the linking out to other articles works differently. Joseph Wright (linguist) (someone who taught Tolkien at university), for example, on the Tolkien Gateway would never be its own article, but here we can link to things like that. Carcharoth 01:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello everyone! I must say, I was rather shocked when I saw "Tolkien Gateway" and "spam "in the same sentence, but I suppose if I plan on adding external links I should focus more on improving the article by other means as well, though I still stand behind the links I added and do not believe they should be classified as spam. But by all means, if you feel they are not helpful, please remove them and you won't see anymore of them. I think the main issue here is not the spam but some of the articles on TG that are a bit too similar to Wikipedia's. I will be the first to admit that when I added them I did so without fully understanding the GNU FDL and did not realize a return link had to be added or I would have gladly done so. We were using them as placeholders but I had hoped we would have replaced them at a faster pace than present so we will be adding adding the Wikipedia notices to the articles until we can rewrite them, this is something which is being addressed at our next meeting. I agree with Carcharoth in that the best approach is making sure each wiki has their own benefits as well as downsides. For instance with Joseph Wright, we do have articles such as that but have no need to include information not related to Tolkien, which is where Wikipedia comes in. I'll monitor this discussion and if I can be of anymore help please let me know, and thanks for your time. --Hyarion 03:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for responding.  I appreciate your intention is to make good content freely available, and it would be great if that could improve Wikipedia as well as Tolkiengateway!  Since there seems to be some respect for this external wiki by at least one editor who spends significant time on the related articles I don't think a spam label is appropriate.  However I am concerned about the linking to articles that are mainly repeats of Wikipedia material and about the use of content from Wikipedia without attribution.  I'll go through the links and remove the ones to articles that don't have significant new content, and I'll bring up the copyright issue at WikiProject Middle-earth (where they should be better placed to decide on appropriate monitoring or action since more editors whose copyright has technically been violated are likely to be there).  Let me know if this doesn't seem reasonable.  -- Siobhan Hansa 20:05, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds about right. —— Eagle101 Need help? 20:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  tolkiengateway.net 

message: The external links section is loaded with sites not related to the books, I placed a "linkfarm" tag on there 2 months ago but non-specific links are still being added, mostly to promote "similar" games/projects. I'm not sure what to remove. 172.202.30.200 19:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The user who removed the tag actually reverted links back in that had been removed back into the article citing competition concerns  .  S/He doesn't seem like an unreasonable editor so I've put a proposal to cut the links more drastically on the talk page and asked him/her to comment.  Hopefully we can get a good consensus that will be in line with having a good encyclopedia article.  -- Siobhan Hansa 00:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could someone take a look at [[Choose Your Own Adventure]]? 

message: agloco.com is the current "hot" affiliate marketing scheme:
*mccallsnotes.live.spaces
*agloco.com
*aglocotest.com
*johnchow.com
*wegetpaidtosurf.com
These links have been recently added by a number of unrelated editors. This is just the tip of the iceberg":
*192.249.47.8 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
**shared IP -- most of the edits are not by an agloco spammer
*202.164.198.115 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
*70.50.235.7 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
*Amahdigital (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
*Glomage (talk • contribs • links • site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
*Glomage (talk • contribs • links • site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
*Librahitech (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
*RAKESHPPANDYA (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
In some cases, they were deleting others' referral codes and adding their own.
Blacklisting requested. --A. B. (talk) 20:07, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  agloco.com spam 

message: I like to cruise our archives every so often, just following up with linksearches on old problems. Here are a few worth noting:
#Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Mar#naxos.com/composerinfo
#:Looks like we now have 200+ links, up from 35
#Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Mar#News aggregate spam
#:21 links -- is that an increase?
#Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Mar#thepalestra.com
#:New account: 
#Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Mar#www.pressarchive.net -- still have about 120 blacklisted links in the article space
#:These will be real aggravation for regular editors trying to save a page.
I won't have time to work on any of these for several days. --A. B. (talk) 00:12, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've converted all the pressarchive.net links to moviehole links per Eagle101's suggestion. -- Siobhan Hansa 13:50, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I just took a look at the naxos links.  I went through the first hundred and only a few of the pages had had the linked added since February 28th (when the report with the 35 links was made).  There must have been something wrong with the link search.  Of the ones I checked, all the added links were good faith and appropriate.  However the accounts that spammed the link back at the time of the report (; ; ; ) have added more links since then.  I've stripped those links out.  Looks like this one will be a hard one to monitor as the site is used as a reliable source for a lot of classical musicians' articles.  -- Siobhan Hansa 05:57, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Looking at the March archives 

message: Please look at contributions for this anon IP. All sites appear to be hosted by a common provider {MONIKER ONLINE SERVICES, INC.)
Sites spammed:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
RJASE1  Talk  02:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Suggested to Shadowbot's blacklist (User:Shadowbot/Blacklist requests). Femto 11:37, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adult site spamming from a common provider 

message: You guys might want to have a look at this, and keep an eye out for it. Its not inserting links, but its intended to insert links. (it sometimes puts <a href=" and thats it). I'm seeing it very often on #wikimedia-swmt (small wiki monitoring team), and I don't know if it will come to the english wikipedia or not. A link about this bot can be found here. Again, we really don't have much we can do, short of getting something like antivandalbot on it. —— Eagle101 Need help? 02:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I found out that a large number of times bots create articles that have titles with /w/, /wiki/, index.php or ending with / (slash). I have found them in most (if not all) the wikis I have cleaned (including big  ones like this one). Some examples are at ie:Wikipedia:Protected titles. -- ReyBrujo 03:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiple wiki "malfunctioning" spam bot 

message: someone please check this fellow (Special:Contributions/Theophilus_Grantly. i'd do more but im at work, sorry! JoeSmack Talk 17:56, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The link addition is www.anthonytrollope.com, and I have dropped a warning by. —— Eagle101 Need help? 18:58, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Special:Contributions/Theophilus_Grantly]] 

message: About 50 linkspams added today .  Thanks.  --CliffC 18:56, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Reverted and dealt with. —— Eagle101 Need help? 19:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  www.artfacts.net spammer - can some admin roll him back please? 

message: Added about 27 times by . This is a new link (it has not showed up before, see insearchofheaven.com archive searchI have warned. —— Eagle101 Need help? 19:27, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  www.insearchofheaven.com 

message: socks
* 
* 
* 
search links
*webcast.challengeyoursoul.comarchive search
*www.boosttown.com archive search
Are the added links. User has a history of adding links see user contribs. —— Eagle101 Need help? 19:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: User added a boosttown.com link after your final warning, he got a 24hr time out.--Hu12 02:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The webcast. prefix made your tool miss an IP addr I link tagged. A Special:Linksearch/*.challengeyoursoul.com can see it. No big deal but it might be useful if your archive search tool did some smart stripping of domain prefixes. I tend to add tags in the form of  so if a www. is specified then both the linksearch and your tool will miss it. It is interesting that all 3 IPs and challengeyoursoul.com all resolve to Denmark with a whois. (Requestion 21:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{user|85.82.197.144}} 

message: See this. The new tool allows searching across multiple wikis with one click. Hope this help you all! Think of it as an improved linksearch. :) —— Eagle101 Need help? 04:46, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do note this is different then the prior tool. :) —— Eagle101 Need help? 05:56, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New tool, again :) 

message: Hi,  The guys over at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rugby_union#Link_spam have spotted that a user itsrugby has been adding links to itsrugby.com Could someone remove them with VandalProof or similar?  I don't have the tool.  Thanks Nelson50 12:30, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  itsrugby 

message: User account has been active since January. The first article created was Norris-Whitney Communications, and all creations and edits since seem to be for publications, people, and events connected with this particular company. I think I'll also post something at the COI noticeboard. RJASE1  Talk  15:52, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{userlinks|Norcomm}} 

message: Seems like a great cause, but they spammed & were warned/reverted last week. Now they are at it again this week.. current count is 27 and climbing. current ID's are:
*
*
--Versageek 00:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  endexploitation.org 

message: This was spammed across 4 wikis, just one entry on each:  en (1), nl (1), pt (1), da (1).
He registered users on all four wiki's.. on en the user was: 
* 
I'm not sure if his intent is to run up the hits on the domain, or actually provide tax advice - but with text like this, perhaps he should stick to domain-parking:  When Time of Father goes in, the question of what to do with the home comes be a larger one concerns. At times, ruminating in the alternatives can dominate a thought. If a person is aware of the several options and he chooses a path that removes the major party the sense, the tranquility often can be the result.   I reverted it on all 4 wiki's.. --Versageek 07:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  all-taxquestions.com 

message: This site contains quotes and google ads (not necessarily in that order).. there is a COI issue - the links were posted by:
*    
It says right on the site: Powered by: Omnem, Talad, Bruce.
The site also mentions these four other domains, which don't appear to have been spammed. (yet).
*Special:Linksearch/*.cyberdunk.com
*Special:Linksearch/*.talkdep.com
*Special:Linksearch/*.lastsmoke.info
*Special:Linksearch/*.buylib.com
--Versageek 08:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  focusdep.com 

message: On my rounds doing work for :WP:ALBUM, I obviously come across a lot of spam articles and links – which I delete with mucho gusto! The latest article I came across was :List of post-rock bands which consisted of a lot of entries with an external link rather than a link to a Wikipedia article. Here's what I cleared on the first sweep. Just a heads up for this project, really, that this sort of list article (although mainly used correctly) is a breeding ground for spam, which, as I say, I will continue to clean up as soon as I see it. Bubba hotep 08:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spam link removal from band "lists" 

message: Promotional links posted by:
*
Sites mentioned:
clusterpulse.org 
globaljagat.com     --Versageek 08:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  clusterpulse.org (COI) 

message: On my rounds doing work for :WP:ALBUM, I obviously come across a lot of spam articles and links – which I delete with mucho gusto! The latest article I came across was :List of post-rock bands which consisted of a lot of entries with an external link rather than a link to a Wikipedia article. Here's what I cleared on the first sweep. Just a heads up for this project, really, that this sort of list article (although mainly used correctly) is a breeding ground for spam, which, as I say, I will continue to clean up as soon as I see it. Bubba hotep 08:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice work on clearing this up Bubba.  A lot of these lists become directories, and I imagine some of the band lists could be worse than average.  If you ever need assistance, let us know.  -- Siobhan Hansa 01:09, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In general, I can always find a great deal of external link spam and non-notable entries to clean up in the entire category of :Category:Lists of musicians by genre. I'll go ahead and add this to the Project "To Do" list. -- Satori Son 01:14, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spam link removal from band "lists" 

message: Link , added by , cross wiki (COIBot report).  English additions reverted.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed last nine links; clear for now. -- Satori Son 13:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  metalfromfinland.com 

message: Rito Revolto is adding a bunch of links to genealogies on rootsweb.com.  It may be a legit website and a good reference but the volume and timing makes me suspicious; I defer to those more knowledgeable and experienced.  --ElKevbo 22:42, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He's adding the link where it's unnecessary (eg the information is already verified from existing sources). --Ronz 23:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And most of the added links are to the site's forum, which is obviously not appropriate even if it is an otherwise acceptable website resource.  Still over 200 links, so assistance with evaluation and, where justified, removal would be greatly appreciated.  See linksearch results at . -- Satori Son 14:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, upon looking more closely, there are over 5,050 links to this website! Most are appropriate, but a great many clearly are not.  If you dive in, please use discretion. Thanks, Satori Son 14:50, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rootsweb.com

message: Any thoughts on these?  Many of them seem to have been added by this new user yesterday.
I am reluctant to act purely on instinct in the religious area, but I did leave some related questions at Talk:List of Protestant authors.  --CliffC 14:48, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Question withdrawn.  User has removed his non-notable additions from Talk:List of Protestant authors and on closer review I have no problem with the other edits.  Perhaps I was too hasty.  --CliffC 13:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  www.dswarnerlibrary.com 

message: This link http://spam.geocities.com/ruleoftherose/index.html has led to huge edit wars on Rule of the Rose, ridiculous, I know. I am just an observer, I noticed the first problems at GAC. Can't we just ban this link from ever being added again or something. It has resulted in off wiki canvassing, vote stacking and relentless edit wars, all over the fact that someones stupid Geocities site keeps getting added back. The article even has some kind of protection on it, absolutely out of control for a "low" importance, start class video game article. Any help in this area would be appreciated. IvoShandor 01:42, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dystopos seems to be intent on letting the link stand, which is a very bad idea if we ever want to see peaceful collaboration on this article again. The link is certainly spam, but whether editors will let it die is another question entirely. Shadow1 (talk) 16:35, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: More input on this is warrented, seems to have gone over the edge. --Hu12 05:14, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I removed the link as the usual method is to discuss contentious material and then add it not the other way around. This is completely out of hand over there though. IvoShandor 12:44, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added the  template and suggested what I believe to be a reasonable solution at Talk:Rule of Rose#Possible compromise on external links. Let's hope it sticks and be done with it. -- Satori Son 17:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible link problem at [[Rule of Rose]]

message: Link spam (Special:External links) for The Baby Bistro added to cuisine articles by the following SPA userIPs in the past week:
* 
* 
*   +
*  
* 
* 
* 
* 
*   +
*   +
*   +  (11th found after AIV report & blocks)
Thirty articles hit so far—I'm not sure I found all the userIPs.   — Athænara   ✉  23:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: All gone. Also . MER-C 04:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yowza, that's great - you reverted the last one (201.252.9.121) while I was warning the talk page and adding it here.   — Æ. </font>  ✉  05:43, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link spam - thebabybistro.com - anon SPAs 

message: User  first added nearthwood over a period of time:
* 
And today the links were all renamed to marcfiszman
* 
I have cleaned them all (all mp3-files).  --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  nearthworth.com - marcfiszman.com 

message: Forgot to report this one.  User  adds continuously:
* 
All to the domain, not to specific documents.  No reactions of user to explain his actions after several warnings.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:08, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: user:90.240.106.1‎ has now two times removed all links and images from pages where user:socceraust has added the links to.  Seems like a WP:POINT.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 23:00, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Socceraust.co.uk 

message: User  has added this link to several articles over the last couple of days:
* 
User notified of spamming and coi.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:35, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  fundistraction.com 

message: User  is inserting:
* 
Looks like a COI, I have reverted and left the user a message.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:23, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  flomotions.com 

message: is now adding numerous links of parallelperception.com, earlier also other links:
* 
* 
* 
:I have cleaned his latest additions.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  parallelperception.com / geert-hofstede.com / nourishingperspectives.com 

message: Adsense pub-0574651796382489 
carandbikeforum.com/ is a scrapper site that violates the copyright of other automotive news sites. There has been an ongoing spam campaign for several months that is only beginning to come to light.
Today: 
*Example diff: carandbikeforum.com/cnbforum/2006/11/new-fiat-palio-in-india-by-jan-2007/ vs. 
*Example diff: carandbikeforum.com/cnbforum/2007/03/863 vs. 
*diff - www.carandbikeforum.com/cnbforum/2006/10/indica-silhouette/ vs.  
Can't find who added it to Audi TT, but another example of copyvio:
*www.carandbikeforum.com/cnbforum/2006/11/audi-tt/ vs. 
This suggests to me that there is no reason to ever link to this site. If others agree, I'll propose it for the blacklist.
P.S.  is unrelated, but their links to http://www.fourtitude.com should be investigated, too. Nposs 17:25, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  carandbikeforum.com 

message: *
According to his userpage, the user operates the above website. Over a period of time, the user has apparently added numerous links to his own website in citations and links for several articles.
# diff
# diff
# diff
# diff
# diff
# diff
# diff
# diff
# diff
# diff
# diff
# diff
I could add many more examples, but I think the above is enough to make my point, along with the fact that this is still continuing today - diff.
I'll also file a report at WP:COIN but cleanup will be difficult as many of the link additions are embedded in material citations. I'm not even going to get into the WP:SPS problems here. RJASE1  Talk  19:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Additional info at  WP:COIN, including an apparent IP address. For anyone who hasn't already made the connection, this Wikipedian is apparently Dennis King. RJASE1  Talk  20:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{userlinks|Dking}} 

message: Adsense pub-1597089000639545 
:Spam sock accounts
--Hu12 00:04, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  http://spam.carscoop.blogspot.com 

message: Here is yet another good cause, spamming links to articles, with 14 added as external links in the last 24hrs. This site is clearly non-commercial, has worthwhile information and could be a good reference if used appropriately. 
* 
* 
--Versageek 07:31, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It also seems to be completely copied content from anti-slaverysociety.org (which does not appear to have been spammed). -- Siobhan Hansa 19:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  anti-slaverysociety.addr.com 

message: Editor  has been spamming external links to video-recipes of several dishes.
* .
All his edits are reverted.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  foodwishes.blogspot.com 

message: Many link additions over time by .  Link:
*   
Hardly any hits in mainspace is almost clean, apparently all have been cleaned already.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  learningtorah.org 

message: User  and IP  were continuously adding:
* 
Clear case of WP:COI, followed by vandal edits.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 21:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: User and sock are already blocked for 1 week and 48 hours, respectively. -- Satori Son 00:26, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  (always)alwaysmaiarawalsh.net.ms 

message: On Winsock_packet_editor
This is an odd situation, either some sort of content dispute or spam on the part of  posting .
The page was created by:  who claims authorship of the application, and states the official site is . Most of the mainstream information I could find via Google, suggests this to be a valid claim - however, this application is popular with the warez crowd - and the number of Warez site hits far outnumber mainstream hits.. 
An issue of concern, is that this application is also recognized my most antivirus/anti-spyware groups to be    spyware and/or a trojan (because it can be used that way) so, it is in the interest of Wikipedia users that the page display the correct information - and not some alternate site. 
I have no idea what to do with this, so I'm tossing it up here.. maybe you can help :) --Versageek 02:07, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  wpe-pro.net and wpepro.net 

message: Adsense pub-3271807191893451 
Looks very spammy and don't have time to investigate right now. The one I removed from Usability had only a couple more links in it that weren't already in the article.  The next article I looked at with it was Web Ontology Language, to which I decided I didn't have the time for. --Ronz 02:59, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed them all. --Ronz 03:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: medicalcomputing.net

message: :Spam sock accounts
--Hu12 02:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  spam.brazilpostcard.com.br 

message: This is an album review site that doesn't even have it's own Wikipedia article. I left a note at WT:ALBUMS to confirm this is spam before I remove the review links. RJASE1  Talk  03:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to them, this is a non-notable review website. Cleaning the links. RJASE1  Talk  16:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aversion.com 

message: IP  is adding this external link, page is not in English.
*
Contributions of IP have been cleaned.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  paraparapu.com 

message: I've come across the article Ultras, section 8 is just a list of all the known Ultra's group with a link to each website. I don't believe that this is an appropiate use of external links on Wikipedia, primiarly as these are purely there as a links database.
All I have done so for is to tag the section with  and added comments on the articles discssion page.
I'd appreciate any comments from other members of this project before taking any action. -- Rehnn83 Talk 14:57, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Groups on [[Ultras]] 

message: </br>
</br>
</br>
According to his userpage, the editor maintains the above website. (The website article has survived an AfD.) Also, this editor is apparently adding links to his website in various math-related articles. RJASE1  Talk  14:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I removed all the mainspace links (over 40 of them) with the exception of the links on the article above. Personally I think it might be time for another AfD on this one. RJASE1  Talk  16:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mathsisfun.com (crossposted from [[WP:COIN]]) 

message: </br>
In the same vein as  and  above, COIBot has uncovered another person who has been adding links to his own website - in this case for a period of about 3 years. RJASE1  Talk  20:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Any ideas on how we should go about dealing with these? —— Eagle101 Need help? 21:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Any idea how  many there are? --BozMo talk 21:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure how many still exist, but User:Gsociology has already self-reverted their last addition and has contacted an admin (sorry) experienced Project member to inquire about how to properly suggest the link so that other editors can consider it for addition. Sounds like a reformed and reasonable contributor for now, so let's hope this is resolved. -- Satori Son 21:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I keep finding long standing editors who started on WP before there were volumes of policy and never really read or caught up with them all. It is even true of some of the first generation admins... I would always suggest we approach the editor first... --BozMo talk 21:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

text: It is a more difficult situation with  above. He is still actively editing but apparently ignores his talk page. (He has never once edited it.) I'm tempted to just remove all of his links. RJASE1  Talk  21:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Note: After checking, all links that still remain in the search are in articles edited by this individual, with the exception of one IP adding these, which is . --Hu12 21:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More COI spamming from long-established user 

message: Adsense pub-9054763690688566 
:Spam sock accounts
--Hu12 22:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  http://spam.illustrated-topics.com 

message: Another one I found that was recently added to Usability that looked questionable.  I left it in, but the linksearch looks a bit questionable.  Putting it here in case someone wants to investigate before I get the time. --Ronz 03:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think there's a problem here, other than these links being used as references. --Ronz 20:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: bellevuelinux.org

message: Observe the technique used to add the link removed in this diff . This is not innocuous apart from the link. It adds vast quantities of white space to the end of the article (). Not sure if anything can be done. Notinasnaid 10:32, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, thats a new one to me. Good catch. Anyone seen this in the wild used to promote? JoeSmack Talk 12:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reverted another one, but I can't find it back anymore. Did not realise it was a trick at that point (it was just annoying, thought it was a render-error).  --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest taking that to the devs and see what they can do about blocking that... that is a nasty trick. —— Eagle101 Need help? 17:14, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just snagged another one. -- Satori Son 05:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From the above example, it looks like it would be helpful to the project for someone to comb through all of the  links. A quick check found news.com.com OK, but others are dead links or redirects to the real article. ✤ JonHarder talk 20:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Looks as if http://tools.wikimedia.de/~eagle/spamArchiveSearch.php finds the hidden code in the archives, wonder if this search can be adapted to main article space?--Hu12 07:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If all else fails, maybe we should report these cases to antivandalbot?  --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nasty link trick 

message: This editor has added spam to Design, Automotive design, Free software, and Green tuning.  Looking further, the editor to be an extremely sophisticated and prolific, for an account created 26 February 2007.  Looks like there is much, much more spam by this account. I feel in over my head with this one, but gave him a spam2 warning for the few articles above. --Ronz 16:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Altermike

message: Thought everyone might enjoy this. If you have any diffs you'd like to add as examples of the different stages, feel free! Kafziel Talk
::Kudos! This, unfortunately, may become the most linked to article in Wikipedia!  LOL Calltech 19:05, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That piece is brilliant. Femto 19:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I see a diff of my talkpage has made it to that page .. and I think I should have responded with 'With my basic skills of pattern recognition we clearly identify that as conflict of interest spam'.  Great page!  Cheers!  --Dirk Beetstra T C 21:08, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A little humor 

message: This pattern is common in bot spam, but in this case appears to be from a human. I expect we will see further attempts - please keep an eye out for links following this pattern. 
Today's attempt was: 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
--Versageek 16:38, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From a preliminary search using DNSStuff.com, these domains are all owned by the same person. I have also written a primitive Java program that gets the IP address of given host names, and I have determined that the (current) IP address of the server the domains are running on is 69.65.125.10. I'm not sure if this will help in uncovering any other domains, but it is something to note. Kyra~(talk) 07:01, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  (pagesubject)###.info 

message: Adsense pub-7013775604640369 
:Spam sock accounts
--Hu12 06:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The user has left a message on my talkpage, to which I responded.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:13, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought you're reply was excellent, by the way.  And their "I am currently doing my PhD" and "you should stick to your area of expertise" is yet another reason I hope that Wikipedia:Ignore all credentials achieves guideline status. -- Satori Son 13:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Cvdwalt does not recognise that his additions have a pattern of spam and coi (but coibot now does), as well as that these links breach other policies and guidelines, I guess we will have to keep an eye on this.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:29, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  http://spam.patternrecognition.co.za 

message: Please see the relevant part of the agenda here. I first searched for Wikipedia in Google News here. I found two articles relating to SEO strategies on Wikipedia. I then found more scary articles with this search. If I had known about the conference beforehand, I would have suggested that we send some moles to New York City pronto so we could learn about the tactics SEO types used so we could defeat them. However, the relevant portion of the conference is over. I think that it would be a good idea for dedicated spam fighters like this WikiProject to try to dig up what went on in the conference on April 12 , 2007 (which is today in my time zone as of this writing). I get rid of obvious spam when I stumble across it, but I cannot fight it all the time like members of this project do. Jesse Viviano 03:40, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: eww! nice job though, we will see if this causes an increase in spam or not. —— Eagle101 Need help? 05:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Their lives are about making money by messing with search engine results, and wikipedia is seen as a way to influence it.  Many of them are still behind the times, however.  They're trying to help themselves realise how to deal with the fact that they cannot just add links to articles, they get removed just as quickly.  Most of it emphasized trying to act normal from comments about it.  One tactic they mentioned was to edit 'normally' for awhile before resorting to spam.  Hence, we ought to see more people who seem to be normal editors in their history, then turning to their standard activity after some period of time.  Since they probably don't have the constitution to actually edit productively for a long period of time, the time they spend editing normally will be quite short.  One interesting thing I just found out I'm outlining below. Kevin_b_er 07:19, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I just cross-posted a similar message to the administrators' noticeboard here. Jesse Viviano 15:51, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Search Engine Strategies 2007 Conference and Expo's agenda creeping me out 

message: :Spam sock accounts
--Hu12 07:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adsense pub-8434586543731520 

message: 213.219.44.247 has been adding a lot of links to More4 News this morning.  I'm sorry that I don't have the time right now to investigate this further but I trust that someone else might be able to look at it and figure out if it's spam.  --ElKevbo 13:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They all look like spam to me, but I don't have the Special Powers to whack them all at once.  Anyone?  --CliffC 18:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: More4 News

message: MindSalt Corporation 
:Spam sock accounts
 Seems to apear under different user names and IP's. Last IP on he list recieved a 3RR warning for persistant additions to Comparison of time tracking software, dodging warnings under various socks.--Hu12 00:23, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your contributions, to wikipedia, using accounts , , ,  consist soley of adding external links to http://spam.mindsalt.com and creating Vanispamcruftisement articles such as MindSalt Corporation, and is considered  WP:Spam. Looking through your contributions as a whole, all seem to be mindsalt.com related only. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a link farm nor is it a promotional vehicle. Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did . Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. Any further spamming may result in your account and/or your IP address being blocked from editing. Remember this is an encylopedia. You're here to improve Wikipedia -- not just to funnel readers off to mindsalt.com, right?--Hu12 21:21, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your response, Hu12, I was beginning to think I wouldn't get any response on the topic.  I would appreciate if you could give me some feedback as to how to add a post to Comparison_of_time_tracking_software without violating the Wikipedia rules.  Other postings had external links and I had thought mine was just the same... but there is obviously something different.  How can I change the posting?  Also, I didn't post anything to http://spam.mindsalt.com as that domain doesn't even exist. I really don't want mindsalt.com to be related to SPAM as that was completely not the direction I meant to head - I am very apologetic and was hoping that I could have mindsalt.com spam related items removed -- I will not make any more postings until I can get some clarification as to how I can post the item. Thanks for your understanding and I would appreciate any feedback you can give on how I might change my posting on Comparison_of_time_tracking_software -- feel free to move this conversation to my Talk page. Fred970 22:02, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  http://spam.mindsalt.com  

message: I can't make up my mind about Special:Contributions/192.102.230.142, but someone may have a view. All links to http://www.librivox.org, but the links adding promotion of the site in each case. Notice , replacing a link, but in some cases e.g.  the link existed and was just reformatted. Further note: LibriVox exists, so it is clearly not appopriate to add an external (second) link to it, when a wikilink could be used. But that doesn't make it spam. Notinasnaid 10:50, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The shear number remaining, librivox.org, 300 is huge. looks as if all the ones added by that IP are removed.--Hu12 11:05, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: www.librivox.org

message: Adsense pub-6727179243066924 
*
 fr.   nl.  eo. it.  --Hu12 03:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  http://spam. bboyzone.com and sock spam accounts 

message: Editor  has been adding links with end with 'for-you.com', from his questions on user talk:shadowbot and on my talkpage it seems he has a conflict of interest.  Links:
* once, on bookkeeper: 
* many additions:  
I have reverted the additions, and the user is discussing now on mentioned talkpages.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The editor recently removed 4 similar links to other domains from 4 pages.  Notified user of WP:POINT.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  (something)-for-you.com 

message: I'm not sure what to make of all the external link contributions by User talk:38.97.130.2. The choice of links seems random but the one link added to Search engine marketing looks interesting. Other than that SEM hint I have no idea what is going on. All those links probably should be deleted but I only felt comfortable adding a spam2 warning and deleting the bostonmachinelofts.com link. (Requestion 21:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Appears good faith even down to the link  correction  in the article Sylvan Learning. However, the labelscar.com additions ( Adsense pub-7963114957883787 ) peaks an interest. The only addition that isn't a one time addition.  to Fredericton,  to Washington Mall,  to Latham Circle Mall.--Hu12 23:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks Hu12. I tagged and deleted those labelscar.com links. Then I did some more digging. I discovered through an AfD that a User talk:DanAbnrml9 is the owner of the labelscar.com site.  Those links have been cleaned too. I checked the other existing link search hits but I didn't find anything concrete. (Requestion 06:48, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Special:Contributions/38.97.130.2]] 

message: Helmut Kaiser Consultancy 
* Search current 
:Spam sock accounts
--Hu12 08:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  http://spam.hkc22.com 

message: I draw editors attention to the Break.com page.  It is blatant advertising. hence Wikipedias description thereof, "Pages which exclusively promote a company, product, group, service, or person and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Note that simply having a company, product, group, service, or person as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion; an article that is blatant advertising should have inappropriate content as well. If a page has previously gone through a deletion process and was not deleted, it should not be speedily deleted under this criterion".
There is an obvious conflic ot interest as will become evident when you view the discussion page Talk:Break.com.
Additions have been made by break.com sock puppets Mtwang and IP: 69.108.152.153 both located in California, the same State (and area) as the office of Break.com!
This whole page is clearly advertisement/spam and it is beyond me why it is still here at all. I ask editors to have a good look at this page and the discussion page Talk:Break.com and break.com's  attempts via its unsigned sock puppets to discredit me in an attempt to gain an upper hand whilst I tried to create an even balance of information in relation to this page.
--Pollyfodder 01:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Report this on WP:COI/N if you think there is a conflict of interest.  Jehochman (talk/contrib) 14:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I posted the above on WP:COI/N today.  "Someone" deleted it!
  I think the only way I can see to resolve this is to go to Admin.--Pollyfodder 06:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Pollyfodder, you are being kind of funny (and not in a good way) by posting this complaint in many different places, and even posting it twice to WP:COIN.  I suggest you reduce the shrillness of your post and provide some facts.  Right now, all I see is a naked allegation without any specifics.  Jehochman (talk/contrib) 07:47, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

text:  Let's take all the discussion over to Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Break.com so everybody can be fully informed. Jehochman (talk/contrib) 07:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Break.com 

message: I believe that you will want to read and scrutinize WP:SEO. It is an essay on what SEOs and SEMs should and should not do on Wikipedia. It is written by an apparently white hat SEO who presented a summary of it in the conference that I discovered and reported on in an earlier topic. Please scrutinize it and do one of the following: improve it, offer suggestions in its talk page, or write a counter-point essay. Also, please resist the urge to vandalize it. I hate George W. Bush for all his war crimes and his domestic crimes even though I am an American, but I do not vandalize his page. Jesse Viviano 17:04, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Jesse Viviano, surely you aren't suggesting that I am the equivalent of a war criminal or domestic criminal because I wrote this essay?  You don't have to agree with me, but you do have to observe WP:NPA.  My sense is that you misunderstand the nature of people who make a living as Internet marketers.  Perhaps you should read Search engine optimization (a good article) to learn what it's really about.  Most of us hate spam as much as you do, so let's work together, eh.  Jehochman (talk/contrib) 18:45, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think he was merely suggesting that those of us who feel that any SEO/SEM activity on Wikipedia is wrong, and seriously detrimental to the project - not make changes to your essay to reflect that POV. --Versageek 19:02, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  No problem.  I welcome all edits.  If somebody wants to add a section to present that point of view, that's fine with me.  Please do. In that essay you'll see a quote from Jimmy Wales stating that it is perfectly acceptable for corporations to leave comments on the talk pages requesting certain kinds of edits.  That's the stuff I am recommending to people.  Jehochman (talk/contrib) 23:17, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Jimbo suggests mentioning the link on the talk page first and so do our  tags. It seems like a logical and sensible method of dealing with link spamming. I question if this method is really a good idea. I have just recently encountered talkspam where a user spams the talk pages of many slightly relevant articles asking if an external link could "please" be added. See Special:Contributions/Memyselfmax for an example. The funny thing is that a few regular editors will WP:AGF and add the link. I estimate the success rate of this spam strategy to be about 20% but the better the talk page plea the better the percentage.  I often run into these talkspam links after I track the link that was spammed in the usual way. I delete the standard spamming but I can't delete the talkspam links because a "regular" editor added it. This "safe haven" needs to be addressed and I think WP:SPAM needs to be modified to deal with this new spam tactic. (Requestion 22:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I was just asking that people keep their dark urges at bay. Some people consider all SEOs and SEMs to be scourges to be eradicated, so I brought up a topic that gives many people the same sense of loathing to show that we need to resist the urge to vandalize it. I know that there is a difference between white hat and black hat SEOs and SEMs, and that we should only focus on making the black hat SEOs' and SEMs' efforts futile with  tags and spam removal. As for George W. Bush's page, I will not edit it except to revert obvious vandalism because I hate him and his administration enough that I have a potential conflict of interest when editing that page. Jesse Viviano 01:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  An essay to scrutinize 

message: Adsense pub-7042355047873605 
:Spam sock accounts
:Cross wiki Spam
http://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speci%C3%A1lis:Contributions/82.78.199.197 
*
http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Gurde_com
*
*
--Hu12 10:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  http://spam.f1racing.us 

message: IPs (presumably cable/semi-static. Melbourne, Victoria, Australia)
*
*
*
*
linking a set of domains registered to Elaine Evans, Victoria, Australia.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(cleaned up for now) Femto 15:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adsense pub-1456781963794036 

message: Adsense pub-6411102925994822 
search link 
:Spam sock accounts
--Hu12 18:47, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  macdroitwich.com 

message: appears to be a shared account, but a lot of spam is coming from it, mostly for  
--Ronz 19:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 203.81.192.67

message: One of the creator's of PanelWiz was reported at WP:COIN.  If you look at the edit history, you will find what may be a large number of spam links.    - Jehochman (talk/contrib) 19:18, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: PanelWiz Spam

message: Link added: 
Accounts known to have added these links on this Wikipedia:
*70.27.88.137 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
**Listed as a bogon IP
**Traceroutes to: p6-0.sjbr1.global-gateway.net.nz. (New Zealand)
*72.56.115.178 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
**Listed as a bogon IP
**Traceroutes to: p5-1.sjbr1.global-gateway.net.nz. (New Zealand)
*75.33.225.189 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
**Traceroutes to:  adsl-75-33-225-189.dsl.chcgil.sbcglobal.net. (AT&T DSL subscriber in or near Chicago)
*141.117.2.239 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
**Traceroutes to:  unknown.ryerson.ca (Ryerson University, Toronto)
*Bluebear2364 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
Spam added to other Wikipedias:
*nn:Special:Contributions/141.117.2.239
*it:Special:Contributions/141.117.2.239
*ko:Special:Contributions/141.117.2.239
*zh:Special:Contributions/141.117.2.239
*ru:Special:Contributions/141.117.2.239
*de:Special:Contributions/141.117.2.239
*fr:Special:Contributions/141.117.2.239
*it:Special:Contributions/141.117.2.239
*pt:Special:Contributions/141.117.2.239
*es:Special:Contributions/141.117.2.239
Articles spammed on this wikipedia:
*Art Gallery of Ontario
*Bata Shoe Museum
*Black Creek Pioneer Village
*Bloor West Village
*Boston, Massachusetts
*Canada's Wonderland
*Casa Loma
*Chinatown, Toronto
*CN Tower
*Corso Italia, Toronto
*Culture in Toronto
*Geography and climate of Toronto
*Greektown, Toronto
*History of Toronto
*Hockey Hall of Fame
*Koreatown, Toronto
*Little Italy, Toronto
*McMichael Canadian Art Collection
*New York City
*Ontario Science Centre
*Oshawa, Ontario
*Regional Municipality of Durham, Ontario
*Royal Ontario Museum
*Toronto Maple Leafs
*Toronto Raptors
*Toronto Transit Commission
*Toronto Zoo
*Toronto's name
*Toronto
This is the first time I've seen a bogon IP used for spam.
--A. B. (talk) 22:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Blacklisting requested. (Permanent link). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by A. B. (talk • contribs) 22:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: goodoldtoronto.com spam

message: The link search reports that there are 22496 external blogspot.com links. About half of them are in main space and most of those have patterns that look like spam. WP:EL says that blogs are links normally to be avoided. It doesn't seem like anybody has been avoiding that domain to me! A person could spend a lifetime cross-referencing and deleting all the blogspot.com spam. It seems like an automated blanket removal is the only solution that is viable but that sort of mass deletion would create a riot.
So what are peoples thoughts on the blog spam problem? I think it would be great if we could get some form of consenus here and then take that to the WP:EL forum. Maybe blanket removal is the solution, maybe the "avoid blog" wording should be changed, maybe blogs should be banned. I don't know. What are your thoughts? (Requestion 04:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to begin removing them all. Very few will be missed, I can assure you. -- ReyBrujo 04:13, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I disagree. I think a blanket removal of all those blogspot.com links would generate an angry mob of editors who would seek some sort ban or blocking punishment. I've had a couple cases were I deleted 100+ linkspams in a surgical manner (i.e. spammer identified, spam deleted) in a single day and everytime a couple regular editors complain about what I just did, some even start reverting my edits! User:Betacommand has had a couple 1000+ blanket linkspam deletion days and his talk page ignites in a firestorm after every one. Personally I think a blanket deletion is the only way to make a dent in the blogspot.com spam problem but the fallout would be horrendous. Update: today there are now 22601 blogspot.com links. (Requestion 22:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Update: there are now 22752 blogspot.com external links. (Requestion 21:10, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I'd be against just a blanket removal - as I do not doubt there may be one or two articles of note on blogspot (or any blog sites) - however I do not doubt that most of them are controbuting nothing. I feel the problem with a a ban on blogs is that some companes/groups (especially technival ones) use blogs and distribution tool for scientific information. While these are not "blogs" in the orignal sense of the word there are blogs. However there is the argument that blogs of this nature construe Original Research. It's certainly a topic that needs to be discussed. IMHO I would avoid blogs rather than ban blogs. While slightly ambiguous this gives reason to include blogs of note and reason to remove blogs that are not of note (i.e. don't positvely contribute). -- Rehnn83 Talk 09:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I'd say a blanket removal of blogs that aren't attached to names (two worded articles with capital first lettered words) would be pretty darn accurate. JoeSmack Talk 18:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless there is a blog written by the subject of the wikipedia article, there is no reason why the blog should be there. Therefore the solution by JoeSmack would solve this. Just do a blanket removal besides for the two or three worded articles with first letters capatalised. There may be a little collateral damage but those edits would be quickly reverted. Chocolatepizza 21:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Three words - You Tube Deletions .... Shudder..... That wasn't contentious was it? Spartaz Humbug! 07:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Funny that you should mention YouTube. There is a stalled thread over at Wikipedia_talk:External_links#YouTube_vs._blogs which I've cross-linked. Can't avoid them, can't blanket delete them, what can we do? Change the rules? (Requestion 17:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Special:Linksearch/*.blogspot.com]] 

message: hi everyone. at work, so my tools are limited, but i noticed was double linked on Casino Royale (2006 film). this bears some investigation. also, not sure if this could be considered a authoritative source. It does have an article (SuperHeroHype.com), still feels kind of fishy JoeSmack Talk 16:27, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  double linking 

message: *  
*  
A Wrigley's Gum site, found while browsing Veinor's fantastic logs.  Appears to be being spammed by Wrigley's as part of a campaign to promote the use of sugar free gum.  See also the COI I filed at the conflict of interest notice board.
Users found so far:
*
*
Would appreciate updates on any other accounts involved and related websites if anyone spots them.  Thanks -- Siobhan Hansa 14:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: COIBot is monitoring the links. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Dirk. -- Siobhan Hansa 15:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  betteroralhealth.org/info 

message: *
*
In addition to help cleaning up after 216.164.33.95, I'd like to hear what others think of cmswatch.com in general as a source or external link. --Ronz 16:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done cleaning up after 216.164.33.95. --Ronz 17:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: cmswatch.com

message: Strange case, two links vliegervaringen.com (Dutch, translates into 'flightopinions.com' or 'flightexperiences.com'), and flightopinions.com.  Links are sometimes changed (see diff and diff, both on Martinair).
* 
* 
Accounts:
* 
* 
--Dirk Beetstra T C 20:55, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vliegervaringencom / Flightopinions.com 

message: A user has been adding links to this site and has created the template Template:OurStory as well.  Most of the links look like they should go, I assume the template probably doesn't need to stay either?  --Minderbinder 21:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ourstory 

message: *
*
At the risk of sounding like a spam-apologist - the site isn't overly commercial, and may be the only source of reviews for some of these Christian music cds/albums.. However, the addition of these links to so many pages in a serial & repetitive fashion makes them spam.   --Versageek 04:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Spamming is about promoting a site someone loves, its not always about commercial sites. Links to commercial sites are often appropriate. Links to sites for the purpose of using Wikipedia to promote a site, such as these are not.--Hu12 05:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Spamming is about promoting a site you're a fan of.  But I believe this site is favored by Wikipedia:WikiProject Contemporary Christian music because it's considered one of the best (i.e. most independent and reliable) sites for reviews of Christian music.  So DantheCowMan mightbe trying to provide comprehensive and comparable coverage that has the approval of a significant number of editors who concentrate on that field.  Which is different from promoting a site you like.  Might want to check with the wikiProject and see if they'll help out with any clean up should it be necessary. -- Siobhan Hansa 13:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

text: possibly, for whatever project this falls under... creating a template, linking this site, with appropriate consensus of course. if its imprtant and notable enough to the 100+ article, ect.--Hu12 13:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I've responded at the discussion on Hu12's talk page to try and keep this in one place. -- Siobhan Hansa 14:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  jesusfreakhideout.com 

message: Is the a template available for notifying editors of discussions here about their edits? --Ronz 17:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just leave them a note on their talk page. Templates are a very poor way of communicating (says the man who just issued a test2). --Spartaz Humbug! 17:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Asside from adding this page to your the wachlist, and actualy watching it, I don't think so. I'm currently topping 2700 pages on my wachlist, as a result, I've now developed Telepathy, which allows me to see out of my ears...--Hu12 17:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hu12 I'd like to direct your attention to Special:Recentchangeslinked.  You can maintain a list of commonly watched pages and it will show recent changes for all linked pages.  --Kevin_b_er 03:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can someone explain how the Special:Recentchangeslinked page works? Nposs 02:08, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is the related changes link.  Special:Recentchangeslinked/PageName is the way to use it. Its output format is shown when you click a related changes link in the wiki toolbox in the sidebar if you want to see what happens.  Any page internally linked on the page will show in the related changes/recentchangeslinked page, except for pages that are not local wiki editiable pages, of course. Kevin_b_er 03:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Courtesy notice template?

message: *
*
* home.comcast.net/~milazinkova/Fogshadow.html
I'm not sure what the policy on this is, this user uploaded some rather nice images, which properly have his information on the actual image page, but he is also putting a link to his website on the article pages where the images are being used (as comments inside the image wikilink). The site itself is just a personal homepage.. (many large images.. ). --Versageek 04:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Should be able to just remove all the links from the articles and satisify it that way. Kevin_b_er 04:48, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  urls in image wikilinks?  

message: Could somebody look at this:
links to irelandliteratureguide.com ?
--Jdevalk 07:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The site itself appears to be a non-commercial, home grown collection of reasonable content.  But the IP addresses adding it weren't regular editors of the articles and they both added the link on several occasions without making other edits on the subject.  Looks like it was spammed back in august 2006 by  and .  193.120.148.177 was warned for spamming (3 times) but the links were not all removed.  I'm not sure about the non en: wikis, but it looks more like editors there copied the links from the :en pages on at least one of the articles and in all cases they appear to have been added by registered, regular editors.  I think removing the links and pointing to this discussion in the edit summary makes sense.  If regular editors of the article think it is a valuable resource that should be in the article regardless, they can add it back. -- Siobhan Hansa 15:24, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  irelandliteratureguide.com linkspam 

message: *
*
*snow.prohosting.com/usarail
This site appears to be a copy (or perhaps the original copy) of 
. It doesn't appear to be commercial in anyway, but it is being added as an external link to many pages for Amtrack train stations. The user is also making improvements to the pages when he adds the external link, so if removal is deemed necessary, it should be done carefully. --Versageek 16:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  snow.prohosting.com/usarail 

message: *
*
There's a tie-in with , who was spamming Infotech Systems, Inc. before being blocked for doing so.  72.156.246.186 removed the block notice on Amics2000's talk page, and AMICS is software developed by Infotech Systems, Inc.  Enough evidence for a checkuser? --Ronz 23:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I used to do clerk stuff for the requests for checkuser page, this sounds like something they'd reject as obvious.  72.156.246.186 reverse-dns'es to www.amicssql.com, which has an administrative contact e-mail of vasu@amics2000.com  Almost certainly the same person or company. Kevin_b_er 03:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! --Ronz 20:25, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: amics2000.com

message: I developed a search for my link count archives; it can be found here. Currently, it will parse everything literally (searching for proboards\d\d will only return pages that have proboards%5Cd%5Cd in their URL), but I hope to have a safe regexer up soon (1 week or so). Also, it won't warn you if it finds any missing archives. Basically, it's still in beta. Veinor (talk to me) 04:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Followup to my link count archives 

message: *
This has been repeatedly added to Graphics.  It's getting annoying.  Suggestions? --Ronz 20:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: myspacegraphicshelper.com

message: 87 article-space edits, 54 articles, 11 warnings, 8 domains, 6 accounts, 3 languages, 1 block.
Thoroughly documented and warned by SiobhanHansa in February, back at it again today.
Accounts adding one or more of these links:
*82.38.169.97 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
*82.38.170.82 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
*86.140.95.231 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
*86.146.76.255 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
*86.147.210.28 (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
*Snesclassics (talk • contribs • links • &site=en.wikipedia.org count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= user logs] • [/wiki/Special:Log/?page=User: user page logs] •  status)
IPs traceroute to the U.K.; some more specifically to Sheffield
Cross-wiki spamming:
*fr:Special:Contributions/82.38.170.82
*it:Special:Contributions/82.38.170.82
Adsense ID: 2908570604091410
Bidvertiser ID: 30359290
Domains spammed:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
:Comment:
Same owner:
*http://gaming-memories.com
**
*http://funny-finds.blogspot.com
**
Blacklisting requested. (Permalink)
--A. B. (talk) 01:18, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  spam from snesclassics.com and affilitiated sites 

message: *Adsense pub: 3509832972481320
Just scrapes content from other automotive blogs and reposts it with adsense.
Two single-purpose accounts so far:
*
*
Reminiscent of:
 
Nposs 04:04, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  autocrust.blogspot.com 

message: I am wondering if there is any process for calling in outside link reviewers to rate external links relative to standard Wikipedia policies.  I see this as a specialized type of peer review.  We have a League of Copyeditors, but is there a League of Link Reviewers? Having a neutral party look at certain articles could be useful. This could look at WP:RS issues in addition to linkspam issues. Buddhipriya 19:44, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ugh, spam is spam and should be easily seen when evidence is presented. Links are either useful to building the encyclopedia, or they are not. —— Eagle101 Need help? 19:47, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that linkspam should be removed whenever possible.  However as a member of WikiProject Spam, in doing link removal I have noticed that sometimes people do not agree if a link is spam.  Asking my question another way, is there any existing process to get independent examination of links to determine if those links comply with the policies for WP:EL? Buddhipriya 19:56, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure the talk page of the external links policy, lets try to avoid process creep. —— Eagle101 Need help? 19:59, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You could alwase request a third opinion. WP:RF3O. ---J.S  (T/C/WRE) 22:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a way to get independent link review as part of peer review? 

message: Present in over 30 articles, and recently spammed by .
Shows streaming video of Bollywood movies. Is this a copyright violation? If not, the amount of advertising alone would suggest that this link doesn't meet WP:EL. Any thoughts? Nposs 00:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  smashits.com 

message: I found these links for a speaker/artist agency after this user spammed Motivational speaker.  I reverted a couple of them, but would like an admin to look at the rest before I get too carried away.  Thanks.  --CliffC 17:03, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm thinking remove them; the sites don't count as reliable sources due to the obvious conflict of interest, and they're offering a product. Veinor (talk to me) 17:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, thanks.  --CliffC 21:49, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "agent for speaking engagements" links 

message: The external links section of Dramarama (band) just seems exist as a directory of links to reviews and sites about this band. I know it's not spam, but is there a limit on the amount of links in one article? I've never seen such a huge amount before. 172.206.122.130 19:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This may be a more appropriate question for the external links guidelines talk page.  50 links as simple external links and not references is excessive, the guidelines say "a few".  Some of it probably is spam - fan sites people want to promote and the like.  But in any case our not a directory policy would indicate drastic cuts are in order. I see User:Betacommand has just done some well needed pruning. -- Siobhan Hansa 21:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This might be a good place to apply the "Nuke and watch" tactic. ---J.S  (T/C/WRE) 21:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not linkspam - but over 50 external links in one article?! 

message: Did a lot of spamming for their books a while back apparently (ended Nov 2005); I saw that the talk page had been blanked by  and he documented it at User:Here/templates/packtpub-spam. Today, I just cleaned out the new ones listed at the bottom of that page, copied here:
* dotProject
* Joomla!
* qmail
* Comparison of integrated development environments for Python programming language
* MediaWiki 
* WordPress 
* Moodle 
* Alfresco
Those were only from . — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 10:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you.  The individual(s) promoting this publisher have been persistent over many months...  it seems they remain so.  I have no doubt this will remain a long term spam source.  Thanks for picking up the chase..  ∴ here…♠ 17:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Blacklisted and monitored on COIBot.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Packt]] publishing 

message: After being in WP:EL since October, there's a proposal (and revert war) at EL over the mention of substituting a link to open directory category to try and keep the number of external links down.  Since this is a potential linkspam fighting tool, editors here should be aware of the proposed change.  Feel free to weigh in there (EL talk page) if you have an opinion on the matter.  Thanks.  --Minderbinder 12:46, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The revert war ended up with the page getting a full protection with the entire segment out.  Based on some of the discussions I have had during EL wars trying to stop spammers come in, we could be in for some rough times ahead, since I know many have used that clause over the past six months to avert some pretty nasty arguments.  I hope that some sort of alternative language is put in there very soon. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 17:39, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed removal of DMOZ mention in [[WP:EL]] 

message: **
*Related
*http://spam.wasteoilheaters.eu 
**
*http://spam.inciner8uk.co.uk
**
:Spam sock accounts
 
--Hu12 19:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Monitored (blacklist) by COIBot.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:59, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  http://spam.inciner8.com

message: The company Interlink Networks LLC has been spamming Wikipedia since September 2006 either directly, by proxy, or both. I suspect that User:Wikiboy121 was hired to create the Interlink networks Wikipedia article. The interlinknetworks.com, lucidlink.com, companycrafters.com domains are all connected by ownership and/or management.
Socks
*  - created Interlink networks article, 2 linkspams
*  - Mobilkom Austria AG ?, 7 linkspams
*  - IP2GO.NET Ann Arbor Michigan, 29 linkspams
*  - Comcast Michigan, 23 linkspams
*  - Sprint PCS Reston VA, 1 linkspam
Domains
* Special:Linksearch/*.interlinknetworks.com - Interlink Networks LLC, Vern Smith, Ann Arbor Michigan
* Special:Linksearch/*.lucidlink.com - ILN Holdings Inc., Vern Smith, Ann Arbor Michigan
* Special:Linksearch/*.companycrafters.com - Mike Klein, managing partner, is also the CEO of Interlink Networks
Megasearch
* 
* 
* 
See User_talk:Requestion#Deletion_of_RADIUS_links for an interesting conversation with Wikiboy121 and the CompanyCrafters connection. The final warning has been violated twice. In total 62 linkspams have been added. A whole lot of spooky stuff has happened because of this de-spamming. There are some crosswiki hits and I recommend blacklisting.    (Requestion 23:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: COIBot is monitoring these links.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interlink Networks 

message: Socks
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
*  - only home.ix.netcom.com/~dfirmin
*  - only home.ix.netcom.com/~dfirmin
*  - only home.ix.netcom.com/~dfirmin
*  - only home.ix.netcom.com/~dfirmin
* 
*  - CMP Media links + some diycalculator.com
CMP Media
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
Not CMP Media
* 
* 
This is probably only the tip of the iceberg, these guys have hundreds of publications.. most of which are fairly decent for the niche subjects they cover, shame of them for spamming Wikipedia! --Versageek 00:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for listing this.  My thoughts exactly. --Ronz 00:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I just ran into the Miller Freeman / CMP Media connection today. I added 9 more users and 10 more URLs to the above list. All of the above IPs are registered to Miller Freeman. All of the above domains are owned by CMP Media except the last two which I believe are personal websites. I've been tracking some of the diycalculator.com and {dsp|eda|pl}designline.com links for a couple weeks. This is an extremely complicated and intertwined web of spam. The home.ix.netcom.com/~dfirmin link is very interesting in that it originates from a Miller Freeman IP and two hours after I deleted those links another Miller Freemean IP added a couple of them back. So someone is definitely keeping a close eye on their spam. I predict this is going to get a lot bigger and I suggest creating a home base like I did with Talk:Penton Media to hold all the information. (Requestion 05:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

text: If the new functionality of COIBot is working, these are all monitored (blacklist) by COIBot.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

text: User:Memyselfmax is related to User:Maxalot who also did some CMP Media spamming. This is one complicated spam tree. Memyselfmax was doing some unique talkspam that I mentioned in Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2007_Archive_Apr#An_essay_to_scrutinize. At the time I thought we couldn't touch the diycalculator.com link because of some talk page "safe haven" clause but WP:SPAM#Source_soliciting seems to imply that we can. (Requestion 20:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  spam of CMPMedia / MillerFreeman publications from MillerFreeman IP