Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:03, 15 February 2008

Welcome to my talk page. Please leave me a note by starting a new subject here and please don't forget to sign your post You may want to have a look at the subjects in the header of this talkpage before starting a new subject. The question you may have may already have been answered there Dirk Beetstra

Misplaced Pages ads file info – show another – #46

I am the main operator of User:COIBot. If you feel that your name is wrongly on the COI reports list because of an unfortunate overlap between your username and a certain link or text, please ask for whitelisting by starting a new subject on my talkpage. For a better answer please include some specific 'diffs' of your edits (you can copy the link from the report page). If you want a quicker response, make your case at WT:WPSPAM or WP:COIN. COIBot - Talk to COIBot - listings - Link reports - User reports - Page reports

Responding I will respond to talk messages where they started, trying to keep discussions in one place (you may want to watch this page for some time after adding a question). Otherwise I will clearly state where the discussion will be moved/copied to. Though, with the large number of pages I am watching, it may be wise to contact me here as well if you need a swift response. If I forget to answer, poke me. I preserve the right not to answer to non-civil remarks, or subjects which are covered in this talk-header. ON EXTERNAL LINK REMOVAL There are several discussions about my link removal here, and in my archives. If you want to contact me about my view of this policy, please read and understand WP:NOT, WP:EL, WP:SPAM and WP:A, and read the discussions on my talkpage or in my archives first. My view in a nutshell: External links are not meant to tunnel people away from the wikipedia. Hence, I will remove external links on pages where I think they do not add to the page (per WP:NOT#REPOSITORY and WP:EL), or when they are added in a way that wikipedia defines as spam (understand that[REDACTED] defines spam as: '... wide-scale external link spamming ...', even if the link is appropriate; also read this). This may mean that I remove links, while similar links are already there or which are there already for a long time. Still, the question is not whether your link should be there, the question may be whether those other links should be there (again, see the wording of the policies and guidelines). Please consider the alternatives before re-adding the link: If the link contains information, use the information to add content to the article, and use the link as a reference (content is not 'see here for more information'). Add an appropriate linkfarm (you can consider to remove other links covered there). Incorporate the information into one of the sister projects. Add the link to other mediawiki projects aimed at advertiseing (see e.g. this) If the linkspam of a certain link perseveres, I will not hesitate to report it to the wikiproject spam for blacklisting (even if the link would be appropriate for wikipedia). It may be wise to consider the alternatives before things get to that point. The answer in a nutshell Please consider if the link you want to add complies with the policies and guidelines. If you have other questions, or still have questions on my view of the external link policy, disagree with me, or think I made a mistake in removing a link you added, please poke me by starting a new subject on my talk-page. If you absolutely want an answer, you can try to poke the people at WT:EL or WT:WPSPAM on your specific case. Also, regarding link, I can be contacted on IRC, channel . Reliable sources I convert inline URL's into references and convert referencing styles to a consistent format. My preferred style is the style provided by cite.php (<ref> and <references/>). When other mechanisms are mainly (but not consistently) used (e.g. {{ref}}/{{note}}/{{cite}}-templates) I will assess whether referencing would benefit from the cite.php-style. Feel free to revert these edits when I am wrong. Converting inline URLs in references may result in data being retrieved from unreliable sources. In these cases, the link may have been removed, and replaced by a {{cn}}. If you feel that the page should be used as a reference (complying with wp:rs!!), please discuss that on the talkpage of the page, or poke me by starting a new subject on my talk-page Note: I am working with some other developers on mediawiki to expand the possibilities of cite.php, our attempts can be followed here and here. If you like these features and want them enabled, please vote for these bugs. Stub/Importance/Notability/Expand/Expert I am in general against deletion, except when the page really gives misinformation, is clear spam or copyvio. Otherwise, these pages may need to be expanded or rewritten. For very short articles there are the different {{stub}} marks, which clearly state that the article is to be expanded. For articles that do not state why they are notable, I will add either {{importance}} or {{notability}}. In my view there is a distinct difference between these two templates, while articles carrying one of these templates may not be notable, the first template does say the article is probably notable enough, but the contents does not state that (yet). The latter provides a clear concern that the article is not notable, and should probably be {{prod}}ed or {{AfD}}ed. Removing importance-tags does not take away the backlog, it only hides from attention, deleting pages does not make the database smaller. If you contest the notability/importance of an article, please consider adding an {{expert-subject}} tag, or raise the subject on an appropriate wikiproject. Remember, there are many, many pages on the wikipedia, many need attention, so maybe we have to live with a backlog. Having said this, I generally delete the {{expand}}-template on sight. The template is in most cases superfluous, expansion is intrinsic to the[REDACTED] (for stubs, expansion is already mentioned in that template).

Warning to Vandals: This user is armed with VandalProof. Warning to Spammers: This user is armed with Spamda This user knows where IRC hides the cookies, and knows how to feed them to AntiSpamBot. Archives This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Timestamped threads older than 7 days are automatically archived to the current archive Talk started 20/3/2006 1 - 7/9/2006 2 - 29/11/2006 3 - 05/02/2007 4 - 05/03/2007 5 - 15/03/2007 6 - 29/07/2007 7 - 06/11/2007 8 - 31/03/2008 9 - 22/09/2008 10 - 03/02/2009 11 - 17/05/2009 12 - 13/11/2009 13 - 27/5/2010 14 - 13/12/2010 15 - 5/7/2011 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - 20 - 21 - 22 - current 23 - 24 - 25 -

Finviz

Dear Dirk,

Since the finviz.com site is 100% free to all users, offers no ads, and is fully related to the articles I was adding external links to (see the similiar "yahoo screener" in external links) I would like to ask you to delist us. After my ban, there remained 1 link on our site, and that's why i believed just the number of links was the problem, not the content. The last link I added was 31.1 and do not know what exactly the 'still spamming' 4.2. from A.B. meant, and the following blacklist. If you could please delist us, I will be grateful.

Thank You, Ivan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.216.227.34 (talk) 18:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

The site-owner received (and ignored) 3 warnings + a block through 29 January. On 30 January I listed the problem on the WikiProject Spam talk page. Several days later, I noted that the user had spammed yet again since the WikiProject Spam listing and recommended blacklisting. This is the first time the user has even responded to our comments and requests.

It appears this user only responds to blacklisting. I'd leave his domain on the list. This is too bad, since it looks like a nice site; if our regular editors ask, we can always revisit the blacklisting.

Thanks for helping me today, Dirk. --A. B. 19:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello Dirk and A.B,

As for the first warnings, I was in a hurry and really didn't notice them, the links I edited were posted so I couldn't have thought of any problem. When the ban came, I realized there is an issue with those 20+ external links, not the actual link, since one remained. After the ban expired, I added an external link to one article, and got blacklisted without any particular warnings or explanations of what is and is not allowed. I'm sorry for the first spam. The only reason I'm asking for delisting is SEO.

Thanks Ivan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.216.227.34 (talk) 22:40, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I understand that you were in a hurry, you've revieced a couple of warnings, and ignored them. You've had your chance to react to the warnings and to a block, something you did not do. I also expect that when you added your link as an IP, you got the warning "Your edit includes new external links. These may be much welcomed links to references. Please note that the nofollow HTML attribute is applied to external links in Misplaced Pages, instructing search engines to ignore these links when computing page ranks. For information on our standards for adding links, please see our External links Guideline."; which you also ignored. Please understand that we are writing an encyclopedia here, not a linkfarm. You can request whitelisting at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist, but you will need support of established[REDACTED] editors who endorse your request (you might first want to contact an appropriate Wikiproject to see if the links are really wanted, see the list here: Misplaced Pages:WikiProject). Hope this explains! --Dirk Beetstra 15:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Two questions re: COIBot

I added a new article Tommy Thomas (sheriff), and I used a cited reference from the houstontx.gov domain, not thinking there was anything wrong with that. Within 24 hours, COIBot linked that article from Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/houstontx.gov and Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Spam/COIReports/2008, Jan 25, with my user name mentioned in those listings. I revised the article to remove the offending links to houstontx.gov, but the COIBot links still exist.

1. Does COIBot ever clean up its links (by removing obsolete ones), or must human do it manually (and if so, who will do it)?

2. Why is the domain houstontx.gov even on the COIBot offender's list in the first place? That domain is used by the City of Houston for information to the citizenry. If that domain is being used for spamming purposes, then I as a Houston taxpayer should take up the issue with City Council. Please provide me with evidence of such spamming. Thanks.

-- Art Smart (talk) 15:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I see, this is a case of 'mistaken overlap'. It is on the list because it 'caught' someone with a username with great similarity to the domain-name ("en:user:HoustonRocks <-> houstontx.gov (63.8%/63.8%/40.7% - calculated overlap HoustonRocks <-> houstontx.gov)", and therefore started monitoring. Though technically correct, completely unnecessery. I have whitelisted you, user:HoustonRocks and User:Houstonazn against the link, and have removed from the monitor list. I don't see any proof of spamming, editing with a conflict of interest or other inappropriate use concerning this link. It gets used by a variety of users, so I don't think there is anything to worry about here.

There is no 'mechanism' for cleaning up these records, they are just a on-wiki record of something that is available anyway (in the edit-histories of the pages edited). I do however sometimes delete obsolete pages, depending on the information kept on them. A re-insertion of the link by someone with a (possible) conflict of interest would also result in recreation of the records.

Thanks for clarifying the use of the link, I am protecting the link against automonitoring, there is no need to track spamming, only possible cases of a conflict of interest will now result in a new report. Hope this helps! --Dirk Beetstra 16:26, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the quick but very detailed response, as well as for fixing the issue. I very greatly appreciate it, as well as all your terrific efforts to keep WP spam-free. Much obliged. -- Art Smart (talk) 21:36, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome, and thanks again! --Dirk Beetstra 13:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

XLinkBot

Did a few things for XLinkBot. Made {{/request|0#section_name}} for logging (modified the instructions] and created archives w/instruct. Ive posted as such in the discussion section. ;)--Hu12 (talk) 15:38, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I saw, thanks! I hope these new functions of the bot (the on-wiki revertlist) will help to keep Misplaced Pages clean. Feel free to add to the revertlist! --Dirk Beetstra 15:40, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

More "finding aid" linkspam?

Greetings. I haven't looked at the rest of this user's contribs, just reverted the two on my watchlist, but looks like another librarian? Paige Roberts (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam) Katr67 (talk) 20:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I left another message for the user. Let's see if the user responds. I will add the link to the monitorlist of COIBot, just to see its use. Thanks! --Dirk Beetstra 10:10, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

COIBot Report for User Alexander Gamauf

Greetings! I am user on German Misplaced Pages, German Wiktionary and on Wikimedia Commons. I'm often listed as a possible spammer in

• Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/diepresse.com,
• Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/gutenberg.spiegel.de,
• Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/uni-duesseldorf.de and
• Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/spiegel.de.

The reason for these linkages on the German wiktionary is citing example sentences how to use a specific word. So it does'nt make sense to put those things on the watchlists. On the other hand i understand the meaning of this COIBot. Can you put me on the global Whitelist only for the Wiki projects listed above? If not please insert my user name generally. Many greetings from Vienna (Austria). - 88.117.77.253 (talk) 18:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the clarification. I have globally whitelisted you, removed the links from the monitoring lists and protected against monitoring again. These are fine links which should be used (though for those users who do have a conflict of interest the bots will still report). Regeneration of these four reports is on the way (the bot has been commanded to do that, could take a bit of time until it finishes the queue), on these reports your name should have a strike-through (if I programmed everything correct ..).

Again, thanks for this note, relieves us of some work and makes the bots work faster in the end! Vriendelijke groet uit Cardiff. --Dirk Beetstra 19:16, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

help please...

Hello Beetstra.

I started a user account as a fan of a company and named myself f alcon cycles as the company is called falcon motor cycles. As a result I descovered that I have made the page going into a link spam context as my name is close to the company name and I put a website link to their company website, so I changed my name to use my real name to maybe help the problem?

But I see the blacklisting of the link is present still. What shall I do to help or can you help? I did mean no harm. I also uploaded an image which is incorrect logo for them and I don't know how to take it away now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/falconmotorcycles.com

Thank you very much if you could help.

JzoJames— Preceding unsigned comment added by JzoJames (talk • contribs)

I have removed the link from the monitor list and deleted the report. Hope this helps. --Dirk Beetstra 14:06, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Beestra now this has helped. Much appreciated JzoJames —Preceding comment was added at 16:02, 15 February 2008 (UTC)