2 IPs and one username have been edit warring to try to leave up their ad for this hotel. Lest even more IPs be pressed into service, it's best to blacklist this site now. See User talk:182.64.48.94 for the full rundown; I don't feel like copying that to the other 2 user talk pages, as they're obviously the same user. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:42, 10 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

When editing Heerlen Travel Guide, I am trying to add a link to a mural image in Heerlen, some of the link is Dutch and seems to be translated as offensive but is not. It adds to the text I inserted. https://www.google dot com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwijmIespKbnAhUCHqwKHVMHB1cQjB16BAgBEAM&url=https%3A%2F%2Fheerlenmurals.nl%2Fsuper-a-colin-van-der-sluijs%2F&psig=AOvVaw1C7-UHj0sq6fvLwZqH6Gtr&ust=1580300521510608 —The preceding comment was added by WaxDutchy (talk • contribs)

Hi, WaxDutchy. I'm sorry no-one noticed your post. In the future, please sign your name on talk pages by typing 4 tildes (~) in a row at the end of your post. Now, the problem is that you cannot link an image on this site unless it's on Wikimedia Commons, our sister site. That's not a spam blacklist issue but one of policy. So see if you can find a relevant image on Commons, and thank you for working to improve this guide! Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:57, 14 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Touted repeatedly by 1 IP and 2 named accounts that are all currently on their 3rd block (3 months). Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:30, 28 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Repeatedly spammed to articles about different places in India, most recently, Ladakh, in violation of External links#What not to link to and don't tout. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:50, 3 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

This URL is the subject of inveterate touters in the Paso Robles article - 2 usernames and an IP so far. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:03, 12 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Repeatedly spammed to Udawalawe National Park. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:53, 14 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

URL of inveterate touter in the Herzliya article who used an IP address to evade a 2-week block to their username. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:07, 11 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Spammed by a number of accounts. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:27, 21 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Repeat touting from different IPs.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:13, 23 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

"Fake" bus company added.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:07, 28 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Repeated insertion by different IPs over the past year at least. There's no point blocking them, because this is their only trick. I struggle to think of any time a link to Instagram would be appropriate in-article, but it might be useful on talk pages, so the domain itself has not been blacklisted, just the Tehran page.ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:06, 4 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Repeated spam at Wikivoyage talk:Star nominations, for some reason.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:22, 12 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Repeated touting by now indefblocked user.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:55, 14 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Spammed multiple pages including creating new ones.ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 07:11, 16 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Repeatedly spammed to the Mount Rinjani page, including substituting their URL for the official tourism URL, substituting their listing for a competitor's listing and block evasion. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:03, 30 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Repeatedly spammed to the Gir Forest National Park‎ page, substituting their URL for the official tourism URL and claiming to be the official link on most edits. Ibaman (talk) 12:30, 1 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

The page Södermalm says that the boutique sportif link doesn't work anymore, the shop has a new domain and website, but I don't know how to add this and I'm not sure if many admins are active. Pago95 (talk) 16:29, 24 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Dead links and spam are not the same thing. The only URLs we add to this list are those which have been repeatedly inserted maliciously or by persistent touts. I have removed the listing because the shop seems to have closed.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:38, 24 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Due to repeated spamming of a link from Amazon dot com. Have added the other English-language versions of the site that I know of just in case the spammer decides to circumvent.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:31, 14 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

There are 31 articles that currently link to amazon dot com, and 6 that link to amazon dot co dot uk. If Amazon is going to be blocked then those articles should be updated first, otherwise they will no longer be editable. You can use Special:LinkSearch to see a list of all articles that contain a link to a specific domain. -- Ryan • (talk) • 19:01, 14 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

Oh, I'm glad you've pointed this out. I'll look at these tomorrow, but suspect that most or all of them may not be suitable to retain.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:04, 14 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

xhamster dot com; thenude dot com; coedcherry dot com; pigtailsinpaint dot org; forumophilia dot com; s5 dot dpic dot me; cdnio dot luscious dot net. Per discussion in the pub. —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:00, 9 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:12, 10 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

The usual. See history of Sundarbans National Park and User talk:Sundarban packages. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:55, 16 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Swept in from the pub

I've noticed that recently, a number of IP editors have been posting links to porn on our graffiti wall. I've been hiding those edits in order to keep with our family-friendly nature, but I was wondering if there was any way for an abuse filter to be set up to prevent links to porn sites from being posted so I don't have to keep doing this manually. The dog2 (talk) 18:54, 3 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

You could add the links to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist as edits featuring links on there automatically get disallowed --Nintendofan885 (talk) 08:31, 4 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Need to be careful to avoid the w:Scunthorpe problem. Pashley (talk) 09:00, 4 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Yes. But as long it is a porn site (not an individual account or a cracker advertising porn) and you specify enough of the address (so that it does not match in another context), I suppose you would be safe. Another problem is sites changing domain names all the time – is that still common? –LPfi (talk) 09:40, 4 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

That Wikipedia article is hilarious! I'm sure it wasn't very funny for the people so inconvenienced, though. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:11, 4 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

There are many people who should read it, as governments are contemplating having service providers take responsibility for content posted by users. The only way to conform is by using content filters, which will have this kind of problems. –LPfi (talk) 13:24, 4 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Has anyone checked to see whether those IPs are posting links at multiple wikis? If they are, then we should get someone to put them on the cross-wiki spam list (at Meta-Wiki). WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:00, 4 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I guess for now, we can just have a filter blocking all the high-profile porn sites. Specifying enough of the address should not be an issue. If someone posts any porn sites that are not on our filter list, then I guess we could add them to the filter as we go along. The dog2 (talk) 18:49, 4 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

• I wonder if the warning about "advertising, pornography, threats", etc. at Wikivoyage:Graffiti wall/top may be creating a w:WP:BEANS problem. I suggest we remove that warning; in any case it's obvious and goes without saying that users shouldn't post pornography or "violate the boundaries of human decency" on Wikivoyage. —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:58, 4 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

I think there should still be some sort of warning that it's not completely rules free. Just because it's a graffiti wall doesn't mean we can start dropping f-bombs, threatening people and so on. The dog2 (talk) 19:10, 4 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

I know I've suggested this before, but I think renaming it to the sandbox like on other wikis might help - I can easily see a thought process of "Oh, its named the graffiti wall, so its okay to add graffiti like inappropriate links, etc." DannyS712 (talk) 21:43, 7 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Interesting idea. Sounds worth trying to me, unless there's some reason for keeping it at "graffiti wall". —Granger (talk · contribs) 06:57, 8 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

I think those adding links to porn sites don't do so because they think they are allowed to. I suppose they use any web space where their changes aren't quickly reverted. Have we been lax in patrolling that page? Then I suppose having the bot clean up will help make it less attractive over time. Is there a similar problem in other small wikis? –LPfi (talk) 10:32, 8 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

I think that renaming is a good idea. What do you think about renaming it to "test page", which makes the purpose more obvious to non-technical people? WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:37, 8 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

I'm fine with renaming, but even with renaming, I think having a filter preventing people from posting links to high-profile porn sites will still be useful. Honestly, I can't think of any reason why a porn site will be relevant on Wikivoyage, so by preventing people from posting those links in the first place, that will probably save us a lot of work in patrolling. The dog2 (talk) 21:08, 8 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

I think it makes sense to add them to the blacklist. —Granger (talk · contribs) 22:21, 8 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

I've created the filter. Admins, please have a look. The dog2 (talk) 23:36, 8 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. Is there any reason why that's preferable to adding the links to the blacklist (MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist)? —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:27, 9 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Oh, I didn't know about the blacklist. I'm happy to do it either way. The dog2 (talk) 18:35, 9 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

I'll try to move them to the blacklist. I think it seems simpler to handle them with other troublesome links without the complication of a new edit filter. —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:52, 9 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Done —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:03, 9 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. It's a little surprising that these aren't on the global spam list. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:44, 9 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ That's because there are certain contexts where links to porn sites will be appropriate for Wikipedia (eg. an article about a high-profile porn site). Similarly, vulgarities may be banned here, but they can't be banned across all Wikimedia projects because they are listed in Wiktionary. However, banning them on Wikivoyage is appropriate because there's just no reason why either of these would be appropriate for a travel guide. The dog2 (talk) 21:55, 9 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Yes, there might be a legitimate reason to link to almost any site on one page, but that's what the MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist is for: we can ban these links everywhere, and then locally allow the link back into that single page where it's appropriate. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:48, 10 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Update: These sites have been put on the spam list globally. This means that none of the other Wikivoyages or other wikis will have to deal with unwanted links to these sites.

Problems that we encounter here are likely to be problems that any wiki will encounter, so I encourage you all to treat reporting problematic sites centrally as a very desirable and very helpful type of community service. Reports about repeated problems are very welcome on Meta. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:29, 14 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Persistent touting on the Hyderabad page. See , and . The dog2 (talk) 17:19, 1 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

See and . The dog2 (talk) 22:11, 10 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

Repeated spamming and removal of competition on Tulum.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:25, 11 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

See . Added to blacklist since listing such a site would be in violation of our sex tourism policy. The dog2 (talk) 19:22, 18 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

Spammed to the Pub at least three times. ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:28, 21 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

From a spambot, and no relevance to travel: see . The dog2 (talk) 03:38, 10 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Added by spambot: The dog2 (talk) 19:01, 10 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Added by spambot. The dog2 (talk) 19:05, 10 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Repeatedly spammed to Haiphong. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Spam on graffiti wall. The dog2 (talk) 17:15, 6 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Repeatedly added by link hijacker using 3 accounts and block-evading at Lohgad. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:48, 22 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Spammed by a block-evading touter and as it's a cottage lettings agency, not likely to be the kind of link acceptable under Wikivoyage guidelines, anyway. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:51, 30 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Irrelevant classified link farm.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:10, 4 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Repeatedly spammed to Sabang (Mindoro) and Puerto Galera. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:16, 18 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Inveterate link-hijacking touter from 3 IPs so far. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:59, 31 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Three lots of touting using an IP address and named account.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:42, 4 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

There are multiple websites claiming to be owners of this campsite, and I think to prevent disputes and owners from all websites. The websites are:

• pawnacamp dot com
• pawnalakecamps dot com

There's been persistent touting, and I think it's time to end it all by just blacklisting it. The owner of both websites have had enough warnings (edit summaries) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 13:34, 2 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Also pinging @Ikan Kekek, ThunderingTyphoons!: since both of you have reverted Pawna lake camp's edits. I can't add it to the blacklist, or at least not for another week. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 13:38, 2 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Pinging @DaGizza, LPfi: as well, since you both are the two most active admins this hour. (I could do this myself, but only in a weeks time). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 13:46, 2 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

I'm trying to add this website "www.thebootmakersshop dot com.au/home" but it's disallowed since it contains the string "bootmakersshop dot co" in it. Can we remove this since the link I wanted to add in Ned Kelly tourism is quite significant. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 03:47, 6 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Nurg, Ikan Kekek:. Is it possible to remove it, and add it back again, and would that affect the link in Ned Kelly tourism? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 03:53, 6 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

I'll try putting it on MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. See if there's a continuing problem; if need be, I'll put bootmakersshop dot co on the whitelist, as it's not blacklisted locally, so we probably haven't had a problem with it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:05, 6 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

I truly wonder what advertising can you do with a boot shop here. Even adding a listing to a bootshop makes no sense to me. (btw, the Victorian one is a cafe, not a boot shop) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 05:00, 6 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

It would be totally reasonable to list a really great, unusual boot shop in a destination article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:44, 6 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Excessive spamming. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 04:04, 15 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

The George Reeves Person aka Ljupco, keeps inserting them into pages saying "What a lovely trustpilot review Wikivoyage has". SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:39, 15 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Tour touter repeatedly substituted this URL for competitors' and block-evaded. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:39, 17 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Can anyone help me to remove this site from blocklist? There are information about me but the website is changed now from www dot western-mongolia dot com to www dot waytomongolia dot com. Please do help me —The preceding comment was added by 66.181.161.46 (talk • contribs)

Prove it, 66.181.161.46. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:54, 22 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Can anyone help me to remove this site from blocklist? There are information about me but the website is changed now from www dot western-mongolia dot com to www dot waytomongolia dot com. Please do help me. wish you best regards. —The preceding comment was added by 66.181.161.46 (talk • contribs)

Prove it. I also get the feeling that you're trolling us to just get your business back again. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:59, 22 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

And blocked. You've triggered the spam blacklist meaning you're just trying to remove it so you can get your website off there. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:09, 22 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

I don't see any entry in the abuse filter for that IP, but for this page. I suppose we won't remove a site from the spam blacklist because of somebody getting hosted by spammers, but I see no reason to block the IP. –LPfi (talk) 10:16, 22 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

See the spam blacklist log. Ikan blocked the earlier IP for one month which they used and got their business blacklisted, but they block evaded with 66.181.161.46 IP and tried to fool us by saying their website has changed when I literally noticed them adding their old website onto the spam blacklist log. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:05, 22 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

I can prove it that there is a my name and my phone number +976 85550666. You can call me for verification. Or if you give the email I can send you my ID card to prove my name there. —The preceding comment was added by 66.181.180.80 (talk • contribs)

I don't think we're going to do that; we're volunteers, and that's not our job. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:42, 23 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Agreed. I'm not wasting my time on this. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:41, 23 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

What you could do is to redirect the old site to the new domain, or adding a link from there. That would be a clear indication that the sites are connected. –LPfi (talk) 08:06, 23 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

I understand you, thank you very much for your answer and all your help. I can't redirect my old domain to my new domain now as I have sold my old domain because of COVID-19 pandemic crisis. I hope you understand our team. Thanks again for your time. Wish you all the best.

I checked archive org. Compare western-mongolia.com from August 2019 to current western-mongolia.com and to waytomongolia dot com. The former both say “TTM Tour Mongolia” is owned by Gabiden Bolatbek, the latter that “Way to Mongolia” is owned by B. Baldyrgan. The phone number and address are given as "(+976) 8555-0666" and "12-06-18 Jasyl Bak Olgii city, BU, Mongolia" in the original and on the new site, while the current western-mongolia.com has +976 8887 5500 and 12-06-18 Ulgii, Bayan-Ulgii, Mongolia.

The sites are definitely related, but it seems our IP friend hasn't disclosed everything. What is the relation between Gabiden Bolatbek, B. Baldyrgan and the businesses? Was all the business sold, not only the domain? Is the person behind the IP not the owner, but somebody connected to the business in another way? Was the business in fact split in some way, with part of the owners/guides/whatever getting the domain and the rest setting up their own? To be able to do something more than keeping to the old domain, we'd need all the story. I am not very happy to take measures to the advantage of somebody hiding part of it.

–LPfi (talk) 10:40, 23 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Gabiden is the person who bought the domain name, My name is Baldyrgan who has sold the domain name. 12-06-18 Jasyl Bak Olgii city, BU, Mongolia belong to me I operate tours from my home and this address is belonging to my house. I think he didn't change the address since he bought. I can let him know that he must change the address on the website as soon as it is possible. Best regards.

I am puzzled about why the domain was sold in August 2019 (or perhaps earlier, August was when the new domain was registered) because of a COVID-19 pandemic crisis. The virus was identified in December 2019 according to our article, and travel restrictions appeared only later. –LPfi (talk) 12:33, 23 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

domain was sold in may 2020. Earlier in 2019 Gabiden was as expert driver on about page of western-mongolia dot com and now he is as owner.

I thought I found his name as owner at the archived version of the site linked above, but now I don't. I might have made a mistake. I'll check again after a few days, now I have to do other things. –LPfi (talk) 14:44, 23 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you so much for your time! I really appreciate your help and all your answers. Have a good time and wish your all the best! —The preceding comment was added by 202.126.88.35 (talk • contribs)

I have removed it as I have concluded that yes, the owner has changed and we (i.e. myself and Ikan Kekek) were confused here. But anyway, please update your business details, and we apologize for the stress we've caused. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 00:06, 26 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you so much for your patience and all your help! Wish you my best regards!

No worries mate :) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 03:34, 26 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Excessive link spamming. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 02:34, 12 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Links continually spammed by Ljupco, and has absolutely zero purpose here. Wayback machine is what wikipedia uses, and is much more reliable for archived links than archive dot is. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 03:31, 19 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Uh? archive.org is the domain of Waybackmachine – it changed its name long ago, though waybackmachine.org still works (as a redirect). But those other archive.* seem unrelated. –LPfi (talk) 04:24, 19 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

archive.is is different from archive.org. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 05:21, 19 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Yes, as I said. archive dot still includes archive.org. –LPfi (talk) 05:58, 19 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Analysing some of his edits like this, Ljupco seems to just randomly put archive links for no apparent reason (he does this on simple all the time, but those made more sense). Anyway using the EF rather than the blacklist whether we can do this? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:42, 19 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

The filters have the advantage that you can see the attempted edit and whether it makes sense or is just rubbish. With the blacklist false positives are much more difficult to spot. –LPfi (talk) 07:52, 19 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Although one thing: Why does somebody need to randomly insert archive links in articles? Makes sense on Wikipedia and Wikibooks, but not here. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:05, 19 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Indeed, this wiki generally shouldn't have archive links, as it's important for our links to be up to date. Wikipedia is more interested in historical information than we are. —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:47, 19 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Indeed – in the main namespace. But linking archived pages can be very useful on talk pages and perhaps sometimes in project space. The filters allow that kind of fine-grained control. –LPfi (talk) 08:14, 20 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

I believe SelfieCity added that onto 37, but it was removed. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:25, 20 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

No, you did (17 August, 09:08). And the expression as added applied also to talk pages, so I removed it (also, "." in that context matches any letter, not just a dot). –LPfi (talk) 09:27, 20 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

See the changes at 01:51, 10 August 2021 (I don't want to link it though). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:40, 20 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I saw those, but they were more specific than yours (which I also did not want to link, you'd find it by timestamp). Anyway, blacklisting should be done only for spamming sites. Innocent sites misused by a vandal can be handled by the filters, which can be made specific enough. –LPfi (talk) 09:53, 20 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

I'll remove .is, but also an FYI, it's being blocked by my computer's spam filter. But keeping .md SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:33, 20 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Porn link added by spammer on the Spain page. The dog2 (talk) 18:02, 24 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Spammed to Dubai three times. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:29, 1 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

This is a legitimate URL of a business. Can it be unblocked? —The preceding comment was added by Historys Stranglers (talk • contribs)

That URL is not on our blacklist, yet it does seem to be blocked. I can't find it on the global blacklist either. Perhaps there's some conflation between sock shops and sockpuppets? Other than that, I'm not sure what's going on.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:38, 22 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@ThunderingTyphoons! and @Historys Stranglers I'll put it on the MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. Hope that works. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:02, 22 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Done. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:07, 22 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Nice one.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:08, 23 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

See the pub for discussion. Temporarily blacklisting until the discussion has come to an end. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:43, 2 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Blocked as promised on 2 user talk pages. Dental clinic trying to list itself among a list of hospitals. It should be clear that we can't list all oral surgery clinics in Hyderabad! Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:19, 2 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Repeatedly spammed in several Sri Lankan articles by 3 IPs and counting. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:07, 17 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello , the page is broked? IGANZE (talk) 21:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

No, blacklisted. Would you like to list it? I think it's too early to remove it from the blacklist. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:16, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Blocked by spam filter for Vancouver when I try to convert the http link to an https link.—The preceding comment was added by Rosspotter (talk • contribs) .

That's not in Wikivoyage's spam filter. Maybe it's on the global one. Fortunately, the link from the Vancouver/City Centre article still works.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:35, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Rosspotter, ThunderingTyphoons!: Added to the spam whitelist. It should work now; give me a ping if it doesn't. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:56, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Repeated touting under various accounts and IPs (including block evasion), now indef blocked after their umpteenth warning. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 05:29, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

I was unable to add https://muze.gen.tr/muze-detay/havaalani in this diff; the site appears genuine and appropriate. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 03:30, 17 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Done – added to the spam whitelist. Let me know if it doesn't work. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 04:32, 17 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

@SHB2000: After doing a deep review of this site following an unremoval request at metawiki, I must disagree that they are a reasonable site. They undertook link hijacking of hundreds of links in 2020, including this wiki. They are not the official site despite their claims, and I would encourage you to have editors use the official Turkish government sites rather a site that runs IP link replacement bot through WMF wikis. Billinghurst (talk) 23:02, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Blacklisted for repeated touting and now block evasion. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:22, 22 October 2023 (UTC)Reply