Wikipedia

MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist

"Wikipedia:Spam-blacklist" redirects here. For a description of the spam blacklist, see Wikipedia:Spam blacklist. For instructions on administering the spam blacklist, see Wikipedia:Spam-blacklisting.
    Spam blacklists
    Shortcuts

    Mediawiki:Spam-blacklist is meant to be used by the spam blacklist extension. Unlike the meta spam blacklist, this blacklist affects pages on the English Wikipedia only. Any administrator may edit the spam blacklist. See Wikipedia:Spam blacklist for more information about the spam blacklist.

    Instructions for editors

    There are 4 sections for posting comments below. Please make comments in the appropriate section. These links take you to the appropriate section:

    1. Proposed additions
    2. Proposed removals
    3. Troubleshooting and problems
    4. Discussion

    Each section has a message box with instructions. In addition, please sign your posts with ~~~~ after your comment.

    Completed requests are archived. Additions and removals are logged, reasons for blacklisting can be found there.

    Addition of the templates {{Link summary}} (for domains), {{IP summary}} (for IP editors) and {{User summary}} (for users with account) results in the COIBot reports to be refreshed. See User:COIBot for more information on the reports.

    Instructions for admins
    Any admin unfamiliar with this page should probably read this first, thanks.
    If in doubt, please leave a request and a spam-knowledgeable admin will follow-up.

    Please consider using Special:BlockedExternalDomains instead, powered by the AbuseFilter extension. This is faster and more easily searchable, though only supports whole domains and not whitelisting.

    1. Does the site have any validity to the project?
    2. Have links been placed after warnings/blocks? Have other methods of control been exhausted? Would referring this to our anti-spam bot, XLinkBot be a more appropriate step? Is there a WikiProject Spam report? If so, a permanent link would be helpful.
    3. Please ensure all links have been removed from articles and discussion pages before blacklisting. (They do not have to be removed from user or user talk pages.)
    4. Make the entry at the bottom of the list (before the last line). Please do not do this unless you are familiar with regular expressions — the disruption that can be caused is substantial.
    5. Close the request entry on here using either {{done}} or {{not done}} as appropriate. The request should be left open for a week maybe as there will often be further related sites or an appeal in that time.
    6. Log the entry. Warning: if you do not log any entry you make on the blacklist, it may well be removed if someone appeals and no valid reasons can be found. To log the entry, you will need this number – 1314545623 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.

    Proposed additions

    [edit]


    Backfilling domains from Wikipedia:Deprecated sources/Domains

    [edit]

    The page Wikipedia:Deprecated sources/Domains (WP:DEPD) has been created to track the status of domain names associated with deprecated sources. A number of domains associated with sources that are currently on the spam blacklist have not yet been added, and will be added now. — Newslinger talk 19:45, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Breitbart News

    [edit]

    Associated with currently blacklisted domain breitbart.com. See WP:DEPD § Breitbart News. — Newslinger talk 19:49, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. — Newslinger talk 19:50, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Infowars

    [edit]

    Associated with currently blacklisted domains banned.video, infowars.com, nationalfile.com, newswars.com, and prisonplanet.com. See WP:DEPD § Infowars. — Newslinger talk 19:54, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. — Newslinger talk 19:54, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    NewsFront

    [edit]

    Associated with currently blacklisted domain news-front.info. See WP:DEPD § NewsFront. — Newslinger talk 20:01, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. — Newslinger talk 20:02, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Project Veritas

    [edit]

    Associated with currently blacklisted domain projectveritas.com. See WP:DEPD § Project Veritas. — Newslinger talk 20:07, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. — Newslinger talk 20:08, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    royalark.net

    [edit]

    This is a self-published website that is listed on WP:RSP. An edit filter warns editors who try to add it, but none of that makes a blind bit of difference so I have to keep purging it. I have no evidence it's being spammed as such, but the effect is indistinguishable. It is useless and keeps being added, can we please blacklist it? Guy (help! - typo?) 09:54, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    chartexpo.com

    [edit]

    Hafizshafi1993 and Shafihafizmalik are blocked, others are likely block evading - MrOllie (talk) 21:02, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @MrOllie: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:21, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    6 websites

    [edit]

    All of these are mentioned in the recent The Register article about Russian disinformation websites network. I don't know how necessary blacklisting them actually is, considering that there was only one link in the main space, but doing that wouldn't be a bad safety measure. Sapphaline (talk) 13:38, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    thefinancegig.com

    [edit]

    Refspam. Fancy Refrigerator (talk) 18:21, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Fancy Refrigerator plus Added to BED. Both accounts blocked. Will run a CU when I have time in case there are any more. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:48, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    rhudehoodie.us, dandyhoodie.shop

    [edit]

    Local spam. There's a few other domains that seem now invalid (except for raspberyhills.com, which has only been added once but seems to be the same kind of website) and were only added once or twice (mainly added by the .82), so I'm ignoring those. Perryprog (talk) 16:22, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Perryprog the IPs are all on long-term blocks (two of them placed by me). My instinct is that blacklisting isn't necessary unless we have more problems. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:26, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Sounds good, will keep an eye out! Perryprog (talk) 16:30, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Alexa.ng — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamilore.garron (talk • contribs) 11:06, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    outfiten.com

    [edit]

    Refspam and external link spamming. Fancy Refrigerator (talk) 15:14, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Fancy Refrigerator I've blocked the proxy. Might be a bit premature to consider blacklisting/blocking the domain. I might run a CU on the IP to see if there's anything else interesting on there. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:40, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Fancy Refrigerator@HJ Mitchell there is also a wikidata addition in the COIBot report, which is making me think to defer this to meta. Dirk Beetstra T C 15:53, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I considered that (I looked at Spamcheck), especially as it was from a different IP, but it's still only four additions ever, which is on the lower side for blacklisting imo. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:59, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't go by counts, I go by apparent intention and usefulness of the material, I'm not here to play whack-a-mole. The edit at WikiData does not make any sense, open proxy editing .. smells of SEO. Dirk Beetstra T C 05:14, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    taktical.co

    [edit]

    Typical spam and refspam: [1][2][3][4][5]. Added by multiple accounts, most recently added on 26 September [6]. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 09:06, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @15,224: plus Added to WP:BED. Thanks. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:08, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Nutrikal

    [edit]

    A sockfarm has been spamming mentions of this non-notable supplement seller into various articles since July – further details over at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Fedrikcethorn569 (and its archive). Only one edit (that I know of, others may have been reverted before I found them) actually added the url as refspam[7] – the majority of spamming has been inserting mentions of Nutrikal into articles.[8][9][10][11][12][13] – Nil🥝 21:05, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Nil NZ we can block/blacklist the domain here but that only works for links. It wouldn't even prevent someone mentioning the domain in plain text. For that, you probably need an edit filter. I'd recommend asking at WP:EFR. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:12, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I've added it to one of my filters; that filter was already covering some gummy keto garbage. OhNoitsJamie Talk 00:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals

    [edit]

    Request for removal of northerntransmissions.com from blacklist

    [edit]

    Hello, this is an indie music review site covering indie records, similar to an early pitchfork northerntransmissions.com/john-maus-later-than-you-think/ Not sure how it made it to a blacklist

    Request for removal of simform.com from blacklist

    [edit]

    Hello, I hope you are doing well.

    I am writing to request a review of the domain simform.com, which was blacklisted in 2021 due to concerns about a pattern of single-purpose accounts and sockpuppetry activity that added links across multiple articles—violating Wikipedia’s policies on spam and conflict of interest.

    Since then, the company has undertaken a comprehensive review and implemented new internal policies to ensure full compliance with Wikipedia’s guidelines. All prior link-building practices that led to this issue have been identified and discontinued. I kindly ask that the site be reconsidered for removal from the blacklist, as it now serves as a verifiable and reliable source in relevant contexts.

    The site currently provides high-quality, subject-matter-expert content in areas such as digital product engineering, AI/ML, cloud technologies, and application modernization. It has been independently recognized by reputable industry analysts, including Clutch, as a credible source and leading service provider.

    Reconsidering simform.com would allow editors to reference high-quality, third-party-validated resources that enhance Wikipedia’s coverage of technical topics. For example, articles on cloud technologies and application modernization could benefit from reliable, expert-driven insights without reintroducing promotional or non-compliant content.

    Thank you very much for your time and consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:a00:401:2356:9843:8725:a94e:caba (talk) 07:18, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined, we simply do not entertain requests made by WP:COI editors (which then also clearly shows that you do not understand the concerns that resulted in blacklisting in the first place). You could try to create a personal account, properly declare your conflict of interest as described in our policies and guidelines, and start adding content (and use whitelist requests where needed). --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:28, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    "We consult, engineer, and design technology solutions to address complex business challenges with precision."
    OK, so not a source, a sales pitch. Guy (help! - typo?) 14:43, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]


    Request for removal of ongurpartners.com from blacklist

    [edit]

    Hello,

    A few months ago, we learned that we were blacklisted on Wikipedia because of our SEO consultant, whom we fired. We are a trusted international law firm. Please remove our website from the blacklist.

    Thank you very much for your time and consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alierenerdal (talk • contribs)

     Not done. As is clearly stated in the heading of this section, "Requests from site owners or anyone with a conflict of interest will be declined". CoconutOctopus talk 13:18, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    no Declined, user spammed promotional stuff after edit here, making their claim about their SEO consultant questionable. Edit reverted, user blocked. --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:02, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]


    Request for removal of pontiart.com from blacklist

    [edit]

    Hello, I would like to kindly request the removal of the domain pontiart.com from the spam blacklist. The website contains a large collection of information about Italian artists of the 19th and 20th century, including biographical details and data on their market quotations. It is intended as a resource for researchers, art historians, and collectors.

    Some years ago I mistakenly added promotional links to Wikipedia articles, and I understand this caused the domain to be blacklisted. I sincerely apologize for that misuse. Since then, I have improved the website’s content and my purpose now is only to provide reliable references where relevant. I believe that pontiart.com could serve as a useful and verifiable source for biographical and historical information about Italian painters and sculptors.

    We are very in love with modern italian art and there is not a lot of high quality material online. We publish a lot of article weekly that could really be useful. Thank you very much for considering this request.

    Best regards, Tommipi0210 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.191.183.5 (talk) 10:06, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined, per the text in the yellow box in this section: "Requests from site owners or anyone with a conflict of interest will be declined". It will only be delisted if established users that are not involved with the site see its use, for the rest we can consider individual pages for use on a specific page through selective whitelisting. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:29, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: this is globally whitelisted after spamming from dozens of IP addresses. For en.wikipedia, only whitelisting is possible, delisting has to be requested on meta (but same decline arguments will apply). --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:31, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Request to remove aircheck downloads from the black list

    [edit]

    Hi, regarding the removal of "aircheckdownloads.com" from the spam blacklist:

    This isn't a spam website, and I don't understand why this was ever added. It's a UK radio archival service and is needed for multiple citations (e.g. the date/time a station launched/closed) across several Wikipedia articles.

    The site contains zero ads and/or popups and thus isn't even a safety risk like other whitelisted sites are.

    Thanks, Ts9909Wiki (talk) 22:30, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Ts9909Wiki: no Declined, this was blacklisted on concerns of copyvio. For what I also see in the records, it could also have gone for spamming, seen the way it was (ab/over)used by some editors. Most of the links that were added were to MP3 files, and for a few that I have listened beyond the link to the MP3 there is no clue whether the MP3s are real, whether they are reliable sources (most were used as references), nor do they clearly state where they came from or who is the copyright holder. The front page has links directly to the MP3s, not to .htm files that hold the MP3s with proper records, and where .htm files are linked I do not find proper copyright information for the site. Besides that, I think that most of this information can be found on better (though probably primary) sources. --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:20, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]


    Request for removal of tractorjunction.com from blacklist

    [edit]

    Hello, I would like to kindly request the removal of the domain tractorjunction.com from the spam blacklist. The website contains a large collection of information about New and Used Tractors as a dedicated digital Market place of Old and New Tractors it publish latest news on Tractor, Farming, agriculture and govt. scheme. It is a reliable source of news and information about price, features and specification.

    no Declined. We don't allow sales sites anyway and this one has been extensively spammed. In fact, I've requested global blacklisting. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:10, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Request for removal of northerntransmissions.com from blacklist

    [edit]

    There's a section about this above, but it's undated and has no replies, so I figured I'd make a new section. This site was blocked in 2012 because it was being spammed by some IPs, but it appears to be a fairly reliable source of information about indie music, and I'd imagine the IPs that spammed it 13 years ago will have long since become uninterested in spamming it. Suntooooth, it/he (talk | contribs) 15:10, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Discussion

    [edit]

    Troubleshooting and problems

    [edit]