Misplaced Pages

talk:WikiProject Spam: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:50, 2 January 2011 editMachine Elf 1735 (talk | contribs)7,245 edits →raregroove2mp3.com: correction for WP:SBL and reply← Previous edit Revision as of 16:54, 2 January 2011 edit undoMachine Elf 1735 (talk | contribs)7,245 editsm →raregroove2mp3.com: fixNext edit →
Line 94: Line 94:
::Yworo removed it soon after: . You then reverted ('''#8''') with the edit summary: {{small|''"Undid revision 403755020 by Yworo (talk)issue is copyright, not spam, see discussion page"''}} and posted similarly to Yworo's talk page, informing him of the revert: . ::Yworo removed it soon after: . You then reverted ('''#8''') with the edit summary: {{small|''"Undid revision 403755020 by Yworo (talk)issue is copyright, not spam, see discussion page"''}} and posted similarly to Yworo's talk page, informing him of the revert: .
::<span id="Kary247_3RR" class="citation">At this time, you were blocked for 3RR: .</span> Finally, Yworo removed the spam once again: . ::<span id="Kary247_3RR" class="citation">At this time, you were blocked for 3RR: .</span> Finally, Yworo removed the spam once again: .
::You are selectively mischaracterizing the what the admin said: . ::You are selectively mischaracterizing what the admin said: .
::Kary247, you had to work ''very hard'' for that ]. But these impossibly unilateral retrospectives on "the consensus", at article talk: ; and user talk: ; alienate everyone. You can't change the future if you're fighting the past. ::Kary247, you had to work ''very hard'' for that ]. But these impossibly unilateral retrospectives on "the consensus", at article talk: ; and user talk: ; alienate everyone. You can't change the future if you're fighting the past.
::—] (]) 16:50, 2 January 2011 (UTC) ::—] (]) 16:50, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:54, 2 January 2011

Noticeboards
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General
Articles,
content
Page handling
User conduct
Other
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards
    When reporting spam, please use the appropriate template(s):
    As a courtesy, please consider informing other editors if their actions are being discussed. Shortcuts
    {{Link summary|example.com}} -- do not use "subst:" with this template - Do not include the "http://www." portion of the URL inside this template
    • {{IP summary}} - to report anonymous editors suspected of spamming:
    {{IP summary|127.0.0.1}} --- do not use "subst:" with this template
    • {{User summary}} - to report registered users suspected of spamming:
    {{User summary|Username}} -- do not use "subst:" with this template

    Also, please include links ("diffs") to sample spam edits.

    Click here to start a new report
    WikiProject Spam was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 18 July 2011.
    Indicators
    Reports completed:
     Done
    no No action
     Stale
    Defer discussion:
     Defer to XLinkBot
     Defer to Local blacklist
     Defer to Global blacklist
     Defer to Abuse filter
    Information:
     Additional information needed
    information Note:
    Archiving icon
    Archives
    2005
    All
    2006
    Jan & Feb
    Mar & Apr
    May & Jun
    Jul
    Aug
    Sep
    Oct
    Nov
    Dec
    2007
    Jan
    Feb
    Mar
    Apr
    May
    Jun
    Jul 1
    Jul 2
    Aug 1
    Aug 2
    Sep 1
    Sep 2
    Oct 1
    Oct 2
    Nov
    Dec 1
    Dec 2
    2008
    Jan 1
    Jan 1.5
    Jan 2
    Feb 1
    Feb 2
    Mar 1
    Mar 2
    Mar 2.5
    Mar 3
    Mar 4
    Apr 1
    Apr 1.5
    Apr 2
    May 1
    May 2
    Jun
    Jul 1
    Jul 2
    Aug
    Sep 1
    Sep 2
    Oct 1
    Oct 2
    Nov
    Dec
    2009
    Jan 1
    Jan 2
    Feb
    Mar
    Apr
    May
    Jun
    Jul 1
    Jul 2
    Aug
    Sep
    Oct
    Nov
    Dec 1
    Dec 2
    2010
    Jan 1
    Jan 2
    Jan 3
    Feb
    Mar 1
    Mar 2
    Apr 1
    Apr 1B
    Apr 2
    May 1
    May 2
    Jun 1
    Jun 2
    Jul 1
    Jul 2
    Aug 1
    Aug 2
    Aug 3
    Sep 1
    Sep 2
    Oct 1
    Oct 2
    Nov
    Dec 1
    Dec 2
    2011
    Jan
    Feb
    Mar
    Apr
    May
    Jun
    Jul 1
    Jul 2
    Aug
    Sep
    Oct
    Nov
    Dec
    2012
    Jan
    Feb
    Mar
    Apr
    May 1
    May 2
    Jun
    Jul 1
    Jul 2
    Aug
    Sep
    Oct
    Nov 1
    Nov 1.5
    Dec
    2013
    Jan
    Feb
    Mar
    Apr
    May
    Jun
    Jul
    Aug
    Sep
    Oct
    Nov
    Dec
    2014
    Jan
    Feb
    Mar
    Apr
    May
    Jun
    Jul
    Aug
    Sep
    Oct
    Nov
    Dec
    2015
    Jan
    Feb
    Mar
    Apr
    May
    Jun
    Jul
    Aug
    Sep
    Oct
    Nov
    Dec
    2016
    Jan
    Feb
    Mar
    Apr
    May
    Jun
    Jul
    Aug
    Sep
    Oct
    Nov
    Dec
    2017
    Jan
    Feb
    Mar
    Apr
    May
    Jun
    Jul
    Aug
    Sep
    Oct
    Nov
    Dec
    2018
    Jan
    Feb
    Mar
    Apr
    May
    Jun
    Jul
    Aug
    Sep
    Oct
    Nov
    Dec
    2019
    Jan
    Feb
    Mar
    Apr
    May
    Jun
    Jul
    Aug
    Sep
    Oct
    Oct
    Nov
    Dec 2
    Dec 3
    Dec 4
    2020
    Jan 4
    Feb 4
    Feb 5
    Mar 5
    Mar 6
    Apr 6
    Apr 7
    May 7
    May 8
    May 9
    May 10
    Jun 10
    Jun 11
    Jul 11
    Aug 11
    Aug 12
    Sep 12
    Oct 12
    Nov 12
    Dec 12
    2021
    Jan 12
    Feb 12
    Mar 12
    Apr
    May
    Jun
    Jul
    Aug
    Sep
    Oct
    Nov
    Dec
    2022
    Jan
    Feb
    Mar
    Apr
    May
    Jun
    Jul
    Aug
    Sep
    Oct
    Nov
    Dec

    This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

    Internet Brands spam on Misplaced Pages

    Parked at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Spam/Internet Brands for now. MER-C 12:34, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

    raregroove2mp3.com

    Despite being repeatedly told that we cannot link to this commercial site which sells MP3s, user persists in returning the link to the article rare groove. She has received progressive warnings up to level4 on the last insertion. I believe she or her husband own or are otherwise connected with the site. She apparently needs to hear from editors other than myself that the link is not appropriate or she will end up blocked. Yworo (talk) 20:13, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

    • I placed a suggested external link on the rare groove discussion page. I was reverted and blocked for edit warring with Yworo when I attempted to reinstate the external link. On this same day, 22 December, Yworo listed me here for spam - my user name and an article I am working on, postmodern religion, have 'links to wikispam' - why is my user name and my article for postmodern religion being listed here on wiki spam? This article, postmodern religion has no external links so I am not sure how the comments below are relevant or valid. --Kary247 (talk) 23:15, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
    This is a discussion page where potential issues can be logged and/or discussed. Being listed here doesn't mean it is spam, only that someone thought the link additions were problematic and that they may need further research and/or discussion. From what I can see, the statements are correct, so not sure what the issue is here. --- Barek (talk) - 23:53, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
    Kary247 used Wicca Magazine in several articles and Wicca Market briefly. The .com urls were just registered 14 Dec and they're already page 1 on Google for "Postmodern Wicca", which is now a redirect to Postmodern religion. They all have the same content she created the PW article with.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 21:50, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
    I'm not certain as to the issue you are identifying; it appears they were removed from the identified article at least a couple days prior to the report here; are they being re-applied inappropriately to other articles? If you are questioning their use as reliable sources, then it should be discussed at WP:RS, if you feel their is spamming activity going on, I'm not seeing anything actively happening at the time of the report.
    As to where the page ranks on Google is irrelevant - Google isn't Misplaced Pages, how they index their site and cache pages are not our concern. --- Barek (talk) - 23:53, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
    References were previously removed from Postmodern Wicca, Postmodern Neopaganism (now redirects), and from Wicca prior to that... However, Kary247 removed two references (not EL) to wiccamagazine.com on 22-Dec at 17:57 and 17:58 from Postmodern religion. There are currently no refs or EL to any of the user's urls (that that I'm aware of) and wiccacovens.com hasn't been used at all on WP. Having noticed the user's history at Lifestyle entrepreneur, and because there was a lot of indirection, (including inserting the refs/ELs in the various articles), immediately following my post on Talk:Wicca where I called attention to the inappropriate RS/EL and invited a response from Kary247 regarding either COPYVIO or acknowledging ownership of the urls, (in a non-confrontational way)... I posted here in support of the four SPAM warnings re: raregroove2mp3.com, and because the user fails to acknowledge that they need to adjust their own behavior. I mentioned google only because Kary247's article(s) were directly responsible for driving interest in a virtually non-existent search term. (Originally, there were only 8 hits). I'd certainly bring the issue to the RS noticeboard if the links are reinserted, but they do say "Wicca Market" at the top and considering the .coms were created 14-Dec, (wiccamarket.co.uk no longer responds), the refs seemed plausibly SPAM related as well.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 05:06, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
    The three live domains all share the same ip, and there's a very likely coi between Kary247 and at least raregroove2mp3.com. --Ronz (talk) 05:30, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
    We could add lifestyleurs.com to the list as another inappropriate link added by Kary247 that shares the same ip as the others. --Ronz (talk) 05:39, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Just getting back to the point, which is that I listed the rare groove link on the discussion board, spoke to the editor and then wrote a consensus on the page, so I am not sure why the editor has placed a discussion here about this link when a consensus has been reached.
    • Again, postmodern religion has no external links, and as far as I am aware never has so I not sure how any of the information above is relevant.
    • The article I am working on at the moment, entrepreneur, has external links, but the ones I have listed here are from sources like Harvard, Yale and so on. --Kary247 (talk) 11:15, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
    You are evading the question, do you own or are you otherwise involved with these domains? The only way this issue is going away is if you fess up and agree never to place links to your own domains again. And by the way, might you also be affiliated with Muse Writing, which offers Internet marketing campaigns and Search Engine Optimization? We don't like Misplaced Pages being used for "campaigns", either for yourself or for clients. Yworo (talk) 14:44, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
    I think we're done with the spamming concerns. It was spamming, and the normal consequences should apply if it continues: blocking the editor and blacklisting the domains.
    As to the WP:COI concerns, they should be discussed at WP:COIN. Kary247 doesn't have to disclose any personal information. --Ronz (talk) 16:50, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
    Right. Thanks for your suggestion. If the placing of links which seem to be associated with the editor continue, I will follow your suggestion and take it to WP:COIN. Yworo (talk) 16:52, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
    • They all seem to share a fairly common ip address which is worldescuresystems.com - as in adobe.com - this IP is the data centre for Europe. see adobe here. In any case, I am glad this is resolved

    --Kary247 (talk) 17:09, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

    Who says it is resolved? You? That bit about the IP address doesn't explain the domain registrations: wiccamarket.co.uk, raregroove2mp3.com, both registered to a Karen Smith of Chelmsford. Yworo (talk) 23:00, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
    • I am not really sure what you are on about, however, I do believe that I don't need to disclose any personal information which I do believe you have already been told. Your attempts to get me to do so a fairly lame, and I won't acknowledge them, I would suggest that you build a bridge and move on, also I would suggest that listing my user name here when I clearly used the discussion page at rare groove to list the external link is a pretty lame way to resolve an edit war.--Kary247 (talk) 23:11, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
    You ignored four levels of warnings posted to your talk page, blanked them, and continued to add the link to the article. Discussion on the talk page assumes that you also stop adding the link to the article until the discussion reaches a conclusion. You didn't do that and that's why you got your user name listed here. That's our process, add a link one more time after a fourth level warning, and it gets reported. You did that, which implied that you were never going to stop, unless blocked. That's why it's listed here. Yworo (talk) 23:20, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
    Refering to your own actions, I assume. Repeatly spamming an article after being informed multiple times that commercial links aren't allowed is one of the lamer things you've done. Yworo (talk) 23:26, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
    • Umm I think I am being pretty clear - it is lame that I used the discussion board correctly to list the link and yet you listed my user name here and over at the blacklist on the 22 December. I was blocked from the 22 December to the 25th of December, which really resolved the issue, so listing my user name here before blocking me first is just lame. Lame that you are repeatedly trying to encourage me to make personal statements online. Build a bridge and move on because really, you were warned about edit warring also by an admin. and yet I was blocked. Once blocked you ran here and listed my user name even though I used the discussion board correctly to list the external link--Kary247 (talk) 00:41, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
    Kary247, you accidentally reverted Yworo, possibly due to an edit conflict, so I've restored his changes.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 01:38, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
    The truth is, Kary247 "used the discussion board" as a result of Yworo's efforts to remove her spam and provide warnings. Not counting the other pages, she spammed Rare groove 5 times prior to her first post on the talk page. This page, Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Spam, is the so-called "blacklist", and she got herself blocked for 3RR hours later. The block did not "resolve" anything, Kary247 continued to edit disruptively and sock regarding online music retail at Rare groove and she has not expressed her willingness to refrain from spamming and COI in the future. Her commercial music retail site says "Site by Pendragon's Web © 2010", which corresponds to the names of her husband's accounts: Special:Contributions/Pendragon111 and Special:Contributions/Pendragon's Web.
    1. Kary247: 20:20, 30 November 2010 1st add EL (#1) *
    2. Kary247: 20:24, 30 November 2010 fix EL *
    3. Kary247: 07:22, 01 December 2010 1st add REF (#2) <ref>http://www.raregroove2mp3.co.uk</ref>
    4. Kary247: 01:46, 15 December 2010 .com EL *
    5. Kary247: 01:46, 15 December 2010 .com REF <ref>www.raregroove2mp3.com</ref>
    6. Yworo:   19:10, 20 December 2010 1st rm REF+EL (rm links to commercial site, not a reliable souce)
    7. Kary247: 11:18, 21 December 2010 2nd add REF (#3) <ref>www.raregroove2mp3.com<ref> (Sample rare groove digital collection)
    8. Kary247: 11:19, 21 December 2010 fix REF <ref>www.raregroove2mp3.com</ref> (rare groove digital library)
    9. Kary247: 11:19, 21 December 2010 hide REF <ref></ref> (sample rare groove digital collection)
    10. Kary247: 11:32, 21 December 2010 1st rm REF m (removed reference)
    11. Kary247: 11:56, 21 December 2010 2nd add EL (#4) (added this as an example of the new digital formats now available - digital option as opposed to vinyl rare groove see article)
    12. Kary247: 11:57, 21 December 2010 edit EL (rare groove in new MP3 digital format as an alternative option to vinyl records see article for reference)
    13. Yworo:   16:44, 21 December 2010 2nd rm EL (this is spam, don't add it again (they SELL the MP3s))
    14. Kary247: 18:21, 21 December 2010 3rd add REF (#5) <ref>www.raregroove2mp3.com</ref> (added citation and added example of a commercial mp3 rare groove library - digital formats/mp3)
    15. Kary247: 18:23, 21 December 2010 edit REF <ref></ref> (dded citation and added example of a commercial mp3 rare groove library - as example of vintage vinyl available in digital format - possibly expand on music licensing issues?)
    16. Yworo:   20:21, 21 December 2010 3rd rm REF (remove spam disquised as reference)
    17. Kary247: 22:36, 21 December 2010 Kary247's first post ever to Talk:Rare groove: “I am proposing adding an example of a rare groove digital library that sells rare groove in mp3 formats rather than vinyl as referred to in the article. There was a list of 3 rare groove record stores here as well but they have been deleted.”
    —Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 04:44, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
      • don't you have anything better to do with you time, the point is that the link was posted on the discussion board as wikipedia suggests should be done, and has been listed here in some kind of lame attempt to win an edit war. What a waste of time. Try to stick to one point or idea, the point is that the link was listed on the discussion board and now my user name has been listed here, which was not necessary. This is a lame way to win an edit war. Misplaced Pages clearly states that if you want to use an external link, place on the discussion board, which I did, and listing my user name here was not necessary as I was blocked anyway. It is just so lame.--Kary247 (talk) 07:03, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
    No Kary247, the point is you're not telling the truth.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 07:53, 2 January 2011 (UTC)


    • My user name has been listed here over at the proposed blacklist - http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:SBL - and here and given that a block sufficiently resolved the situation, I feel that this relates more to edit warring, which is so pathetic. Some kind of bot has been placed in connection with my user name which resolves to ip address adobe.com which is ridiculous. A simple block should have been the first step, particularly given that the discussion page was used to list the suggested site. The editor who reverted me was warned by an admin. for edit warring. The same editor listed my user name here and over at the black list place, on the same day the 22 December. It is just so obviously a lame way to connect my user name with wikispam. How mean.--Kary247 (talk) 08:11, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
    • I was blocked for edit warring(NOT spam) at blocked for edit warring at 20.08 and yet the editor reported my user name here and at the proposed blacklist at 20.26, see Yworo listing at 20.26so what was the point of that, just being mean. I was blocked anyway, and as I have mentioned, so it is just mean and not following the suggested guidelines, to go and list my user name after I was blocked here and there regardless. Also, given you were spoken to by an admin. about your inappropriate role in the edit warring, this implies that you disregarded admin. advice and continued to edit war by listing my user name.--Kary247 (talk) 14:59, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
    I see, WP:SBL is the "blacklist" you are referring to. As you're aware, your block was for 3RR, not for spam. However, you've subsequently earned another warning at that very same article, (Rare groove). You might want to be more explicit about what you mean by "sufficiently resolved the situation" because there's certainly a COI concern regarding your edits. For example, attempting to turn it into a redirect: 01:19, 29 December 2010.
    I don't know what you mean about adobe.com? I know your Wicca Magazine suggests downloading adobe's reader: “DOWNLOAD WICCA MAGAZINE EPUB FOR IPAD, KINDLE, SONY READER, PC. LAPTOP AND MORE” and that when you returned from your 3RR block,you attempted to create an EPUB book article: 02:10, 26 December 2010, which is now a redirect to EPUB, (EPUB_book historyTalk:EPUB_book history).
    After your first post to the article's talk page, a "discussion" followed: 00:15, 22 December 2010... revolving around your insistence that it's all some sort of copyright issue, and that was followed by a rather disingenuous "Compromise-Suggested re-wording" 19:28, 22 December 2010.
    Yworo was kind enough to explain the correct issues involved, despite WP:IDHT on your part... Regardless, over Yworo's objection and WP:BURDEN/WP:ELBURDEN, you added citation spam (#6) to the article, yet again, but this time the link was to your "About Us" page: 11:25, 22 December 2010.
    I personally haven't seen anything on your website that would lead me to believe you're licensed. It seems you have no policies posted at all... If I understand correctly, you create MP3s from vinyl and customers pay £0.55 per download.
    In any case, Yworo removed the citation spam: 15:19, 22 December 2010. You then reinserted (#7) a citation that pointed directly to your home page: 19:19, 22 December 2010 and twenty minutes later, you switched it to an EL: 19:39, 22 December 2010.
    Yworo removed it soon after: 20:03, 22 December 2010. You then reverted (#8) with the edit summary: "Undid revision 403755020 by Yworo (talk)issue is copyright, not spam, see discussion page" 20:48, 22 December 2010 and posted similarly to Yworo's talk page, informing him of the revert: 20:59, 22 December 2010.
    At this time, you were blocked for 3RR: 21:08, 22 December 2010. Finally, Yworo removed the spam once again: 21:27, 22 December 2010.
    You are selectively mischaracterizing what the admin said: 22:21, 22 December 2010.
    Kary247, you had to work very hard for that WP:SBL. But these impossibly unilateral retrospectives on "the consensus", at article talk: 17:11, 27 December 2010; and user talk: 14:29, 28 December 2010; alienate everyone. You can't change the future if you're fighting the past.
    —Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 16:50, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

    buyerzone.com

    Found this while doing some other cleanup. I don't have time to investigate or cleanup this one. If it wasn't spammed, most of the links still appear to fail WP:ELNO. --Ronz (talk) 17:30, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
    Looks like someone cleaned this up. Thanks! --Ronz (talk) 19:26, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
    Another one, unrelated to buyerzone other than it needs investigation and cleanup. --Ronz (talk) 18:28, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

    sourcesecurity.com and thebigredguide.com

    Links
    Accounts
    COI-spamming. I left a few references (5 sourcesecurity and 4 thebigredguide) that weren't spam and might be considered passable sources. --Ronz (talk) 01:34, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

    mindymccreadyofficial.com

    Link
    Repeatedly entered into the Mindy McCready article, this is a fansite that IPs keep trying to sneakily pass off as the singer's official website. Diffs , , , etc. etc. - Burpelson AFB ✈ 20:04, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

    mycamprofile.com

    link
    account
    see also

    Ongoing attempt by a WP:SPA to insert advert linkspam into multiple articles. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 07:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

    wladcadyskietek.cba.pl and remix64.com

    link

    wladcadyskietek.cba.pl: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com remix64.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

    account
    Repeated attempts by Account and IP socks to insert spam links into articles and into edit summaries. - Burpelson AFB ✈ 15:57, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

    nobleherb.com

    link

    nobleherb.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Misplaced Pages: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

    accounts

    119.181.13.244 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)

    Links to domain being spammed across several articles. --BelovedFreak 10:32, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

    Category:
    Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Spam: Difference between revisions Add topic