text:
ePhotoUploader 22.214.171.124-signed
by ePhotoBay
ePhoto Uploader is a Mozilla/Firefox addon to allow you to upload any image on websites you're browsing to your ePhotoBay account by just one click. For the addon to work a free ePhotoBay account is required.
This add-on has been preliminarily reviewed by Mozilla. Learn more
This add-on is not compatible with your version of Firefox because of the following:


text:
August 4, 2015
COLLEGE STATION, Texas (AP) - Johnny Manziel threw for 426 yards and three touchdowns and ran for another score in less than three quarters to give No. 7 Texas A&M to a 65-28 win over Sam Houston State on Saturday night.
The Heisman Trophy-winner played about a quarter more than he did last week when he sat out the first half serving a suspension for what the school called an "inadvertent" violation of NCAA rules involving signing autographs.
Texas A&M's suspension-depleted defense was burned for several big plays by the Bearkats, the FCS runner-up the last two seasons, in the final tuneup before next week's rematch with top-ranked Alabama.
Sam Houston's Timothy Flanders had 170 yards rushing with two scores and added a TD reception.
Texas A&M's Mike Evans had a career-high 155 yards receiving, Tra Carson ran for 51 with two touchdowns and Ben Malena had 68 yards rushing and a score.
To comment, the following rules must be followed:
Comments may be monitored for inappropriate content, but the station is under no legal obligation to do so.
If you believe a comment violates the above rules, please use the Flagging Tool to alert a Moderator.
Flagging does not guarantee removal.
Multiple violations may result in account suspension.
Decisions to suspend or unsuspend accounts are made by Station Moderators.
Questions may be sent to email@example.com. Please provide detailed information.
Click Here to access the online Public Inspection File
Viewers with disabilities can get assistance accessing this station's FCC Public Inspection File by contacting the station with the information listed below. Questions or concerns relating to the accessibility of the FCC's online public file system should be directed to the FCC at 888-225-5322, 888-835-5322 (TTY), or email@example.com.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
...and thanks to Rene for the most hilarious Photoshop I've seen in at least a week!
Wired's 3G Study Blames Carriers for Problems + Swedish Antenna Test Confirms?
Remember the Wired.com Global iPhone 3G Study Casey posted about a week or so back? Well, the results are in, and Wired's conclusion is interesting to say the least:
In our view, this data is a strong indicator that performance of the mobile carrier's network is affecting the iPhone 3G more than the handset itself.
Wired further cites the recent Swedish engineering tests, run by Bluetest, which showed that the iPhone 3G's eponymous radio and antenna performed roughly the same as those of the other handsets they tested.
So where does this leave the last, 2.0.2 firmware tweaks from Apple, and hopes that 2.1 would further fix 3G connection problems? Chipset and firmware finger-pointing may have been misplaced, or at least been only part of a larger overall 3G connectivity knot. Either way, it looks like the tennis ball has just been rocketed back into AT&T (and the other carriers') court for now.
From an end-user's perspective, however, especially if you're one of the unfortunate 2%, other than providing some entertaining distraction, does the blame game really help us? Or do we just want it fixed, like, yesterday?
(Thanks Bad Ash and yc for the tips! Thanks to the TiPb faithful who went over there to help out with the study, and thanks to Wired for recognizing them!)
Have something to say about this story? Leave a comment! Need help with something else? Ask in our forums!
Reader comments
Wired's 3G Study Blames Carriers for Problems + Swedish Antenna Test Confirms?
I think that to assume it's the carrier is somewhat ridiculous when the carriers already have 3G phones that have been working for the better part of a year and a half. I've never had these sorts of problems with my Treo 750, nor have I heard of a mass of Tilt users or blackjack users having all of these sorts of issues. The problem with 3G on the iPhone is Apple's, and they know it. That is why they've committed to fixing it by September.
This is absurd and I cannot stand "news articles" like these that seem to be cropping up everywhere. I have one thing to say, Apple sure is doing a great job of covering their ass and shifting the blame.
I have two 3G phones (non-Apple on AT&T) that do not have a problem with 3G service and one iPhone that does (and this is my second iPhone!!!)
Let's look toward a fix Apple. Yes, this is a problem... and it's Apple's problem... now quit spending money trying to spin the news to look better and FIX IT.
Ewww... I am starting to get angry. This isn't pretty.
"I think that to assume it's the carrier is somewhat ridiculous when the carriers already have 3G phones that have been working for the better part of a year and a half."
I've compared my Nokia E61i with 4 iPhones 3G, all of them hade much worse 3G receiving, showed 1-2 bars, while using Safari and Maps falled back to EDGE. At the same time the Nokia maintained 3G without problem while transfered data with Google Maps. This tested in Poland, carrier ERA with 3G since 2 years.
I am using Fido in Canada and my 3G download speed is not even close to what it say in the "survey". On average i am getting 300kbps.. on a good and rare time, maybe 450kbps.
Here's probably what went down.
Steve: "I am pretty sure it's the carriers"
Wired: "The survey result ain't so hot Mr. Jobs"
Steve: "Are you sure? Here are some free iPhones for you guys to test yourselves."
Wired: "well, if you put it that way, we'll double the speeds being reported"
Steve: "Here are more free Mac stuff for you guys... plus i'll throw in several of my turtle necks sweaters"
Wired: "how does 3x and/or 4x the reported speed sounds?"
Steve: "Told you it's the carriers, not the iPhone"
Steve: "Make sure you find some way to blame Windows"
Wired: "We are way ahead of you"


text:
Carrie Brownstein's Reading List: How Many Have You Read?
BY Hanna Lustig in General on Jul 31, 2015
Alabama Tried to Deny Woman Abortion by Giving Fetus An Attorney
BY Alexa Salvato in Feminism on Jul 31, 2015
Like Most Media, NPR Dominated By White Men's Voices (Literally)
BY Alexa Salvato in General on Jul 30, 2015
Black Women Pay More for a Home Loan
BY Elizabeth Ollero in General on Jul 30, 2015
Welcome to the ladysphere, Broadly!
BY Hanna Lustig in Feminism on Jul 30, 2015
Jane Birkin Is Over the Birkin Bag—For a Good Reason
BY Elizabeth Ollero in General on Jul 30, 2015
Macy Gray's Newest Love Song Is Dedicated to Her Vibrator
BY Alexa Salvato in Music on Jul 30, 2015
The Arizona Cardinals Hired The First Female Coach Ever
BY Isabel Bartholomew in Entertainment on Jul 29, 2015
Are You Sarcastic? Good Job: It Means You're More Creative
BY Elizabeth Ollero in General on Jul 29, 2015
On Newsstands Now: Aug/Sept 2015
Trending on BUST
Upcoming Events
|NYC Metal Benefits for the White Helmets
Sat Aug 01 @ 7:00PM - 11:00PM
|The Wahine Classic (NC)
Fri Aug 14 @ 8:00AM - 12:00AM
|Riot Grrrl Exhibition, Alien She (Portland, OR)
Thu Sep 03 @12:00AM
| L7 at Irving Plaza (NYC)
Tue Sep 08 @ 7:00PM - 10:00PM
|The Pandoras at Monty Hall (NJ)
Sun Sep 13 @ 7:30PM -


text:
Recent Press Releases
A total of 182 schools across the state that will be honored this year at a ceremony in Madison on Monday, Oct. 13, 2008.
To be recognized, schools must be eligible to receive federal Title I funding and be among the highest poverty schools in the state based on free and reduced-price school lunch data. Additionally, student achievement on statewide reading and mathematics assessments must outperform the state average for schools with similar poverty rates and grade configurations. Finally, the school must have made adequate yearly progress for the past two years as defined under the federal No Child Left Behind Act.
"Being named a New Wisconsin Promise School of Recognition celebrates the efforts these schools make to create a learning climate that supports every student," State Superintendent Elizabeth Burmaster said. "It is the work of teachers, parents, administrators, and other staff members at these schools that contribute to student success and help us fulfill our New Wisconsin Promise to provide a quality education for every child and to close the achievement gap between economically disadvantaged students and their peers."
Schools meeting all four criteria will receive award plaques at an Oct. 13 ceremony at the State Capitol and $1,500 for use by the school. During the awards ceremony, 15 schools will receive flags for earning the New Wisconsin Promise School of Recognition award for five consecutive years. Another 14 schools have been named for recognition since the program's inception. They received flags last year.
"Our democracy depends on an educated citizenry," Burmaster said. "The strength of our public schools directly contributes to the strength of our nation and our economic well-being. We must invest in our public schools to ensure our young people graduate with the skills they need to take their place in our interconnected world and the 21st century workplace."
September 19, 2008


text:
Buffalo Head Coach Turner Gill Post-Game Quotes
Sept. 15, 2007
Recap | Coach Paterno Quotes | Penn State Player Quotes | Buffalo Player Quotes | Final Stats | Notes | Photo Gallery | AP Photo Gallery | Post-Game Podcast
Q: Comment on the personnel on the halfback pass...
Q: How encouraged are you after today's game?
Q: Can you comment on the offense?
Q: Can you talk about the defensive effort?
Q: How did you handle the blitzing today from Penn State?
Q: What did you see from Penn State's pass defense before the game?
Q: Comment on Penn State...
Q: What adjustments were made at halftime?
Q: Does this give you more confidence defensively?
Q: What does Andrew Quarless bring to Penn State?


text:
Also, some of the recipes have a bonus "What the Community Said" section featuring comments from the website. It's just like the internet, but printed in a book! - Paula Forbes
Eater National | Take a Look at the Food52 Cookbook
If you like it, save it!
Save and organize all of the stuff you love in one place.Got it!
If you like something…
Click the heart, it's called favoriting. Favorite the stuff you like.Got it!
Anything But Watered Down
Pair tomato water with pasta
Tomato water: the sauce of summer.
Butter pecan ice cream for impatient cooks.
It's time to travel.
Tomato skins, meet salt.
Put cake on a pedestal.


text:
Arizona Cardinals
Cardinals' QB Carson Palmer not as sharp against Cowboys
Arizona Cardinals quarterback Carson Palmer was not as sharp in his second preseason outing against the Dallas Cowboys at University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale Saturday afternoon.
The veteran signal caller completed 7-of-15 passes for 66 yards. Palmer did not throw for any touchdowns or interceptions in his stint of action. He finished with a quarterback rating of 59.3.
The Cardinals defeated the Cowboys 12-7, but did not play up to par offensively.
"It's not anything that we were physically beat on or beat with speed," Palmer said. "It was silly, sloppy things and I put that on my shoulders."
While Palmer connected with receiver Larry Fitzgerald on a couple of passes early, he also struggled with communication amongst some of his wideouts.
"When it's a little bit sloppy here, a little bit sloppy there, you don't convert and you don't stay on the field," Palmer said. "We'll talk about them, we'll look at them and we'll move on from them."
The 33-year-old also threw behind running back Alfonso Smith for an incomplete pass on third down in the first quarter, forcing the Cardinals to settle for a field goal.
Palmer said he'll have to go back and look at the tape of that play to see what adjustments to make going forward.
"I think I let the ball go and they collapsed on Alfonso in the corner of the end zone," Palmer explained. "But I'll look at it and make a decision and find a way to convert that into seven points."
Palmer said while he thinks the Cardinals are in a good place after two preseason games, he's not satisfied.
The Cardinals' starters are expected to play into the third quarter next week against San Diego and Palmer is looking forward to seeing more action.
"I think we're in a good spot," Palmer said. "Hopefully next week, I don't know the exact number of reps, but you get that chance to go in the locker room and make those halftime adjustments and then come out in that third quarter.
"So it's just another chance to play more, which I know all our guys on offense want the opportunity to be on the field more."
Most Popular
Cardinals Audio
- Jen Welter, Cardinals assistant coach - Tuesday July 28Welter talks about the historical significance of her hire, and how she'll approach the job
- Bickley Blast - Tuesday July 28The Cardinals made a ground breaking coaching hire
- Former Arizona Cardinals Pro Bowler Bertrand Berry - Tuesday July 28Bertrand Berry talks about the Cardinals hiring Jen Welter as the first woman coach in NFL history.
- Glenn Parker, Pac-12 and Cardinals analyst - Tuesday July 28Glenn Parker discusses new Cardinals coach Jen Welter and the strength of the Pac-12 South.
- Hardware - Monday July 27The Sign of Our Times award, the 2nd Place Isn't So Bad award and more


text:
In response to russgriswold's comment:
In response to seawolfxs' comment:
In response to russgriswold's comment:
In response to seawolfxs' comment:
In response to 42AND46's comment:
In response to seawolfxs' comment:
if you really do the accounting - they sold for 70M and still owe 110M that means they sold it for a loss
NYT is owned by a guy (from mexico) who don't even have to break even,
They talk about how we must be good to unions , how to run businesess, and look how they treat their own
If the NYT fails there will be a tidal wave of 2ndary failures and a big loss of liberal doctrine. The NYT is a primary resource of national and international stories for a plethora of 2ndary papers
I still like reading real paper - i get tired of the screen, but someday i may not have a choice
Pat's Fan lost in Jet Land
a big loss in liberal doctrine? hahahaha u must be old
yeah like any printed paper is carrying anyone's doctrine anymore...say u know rush limbaugh has lost almost 50 sponsors in the last 3 months and faux news ratings have tumbled? better get some better sources to provide that conservative doctrine
oh boy,
if you don't understand that the NYT is still the #1 liberal, progressive news source I can not help you. Will they always be? Maybe, maybe not - depends on how they evolve. Right now Billionaire lefties are trying to save them. NYT,BG,WP and LA times next. And the reason for that? You tell me, if you can.
Has print media been marginalized? A lot. But I wish the NYT would go away altogether! Every major politician today still reads it, and most left wing publications (including the HP , Politco, etc) still follow it's lead. Unfortunately, what the NYT talks about, they all talk about. And what they don't talk about , few talk about
The entire media has been Balkanized, and overrun with Political Correctness to be used to beat people over the head. Maybe there will be a better day - but not soon - as you have just demonstrated.
I do not worry about any millionaires or Rush. Rush loses sponsors and he gets new ones. I doubt you have ever really "listened " to him. Or if you have, it is out of context or with a mental blockage. They have been gunning for him for 25 yrs. They do it by threatening sponsors - so much for freedom of speech.
In the end the choice is between
Big Government, Big Business, Big Unions, Big Media, Big Hollywood, Big/Elitist Education and useful Idiots. Which is the defintion of facism. And is what Stalin called Hitler for Hitlers' brand of socialism (See Detroit for example of liberal dogma) and please i am not talking about the Holocaust
Individual freedoms, Free markets, (and that means for you too).
This is not the forum for talking politics and I will probably curse myself for posting this.
However, I doubt you understand what is facing us, and I feel sorry for you, and us. If you do want to begin understanding, try "googling" Ricard A Epstein. I f you can begin to even understand him, you might be worth talking to about something serious. Good luck, I think you will need it.
And btw when you get old - what ever that is - I hope you pull this out so you can see that you should then see yourself as irrelevant - but then why wait.
I am now going back to just talking about the Pats. I have no desire for anything else. Thisis my escape, but there is a thread of intolerance here. From now on if the post is not directly linked to the Pats, and there is name calling - I won't read and devolve into it. And finally I do not care about anyone's political views (great, you are more than welcome to them, really ). When it comes to discussing the Pats I just want good sports conversation. I agree with alot of what is said by quite a few fans . and I disagree too. But with respect. Just like being at a bar shooting the s***
Sorry for the rift but this post I answered to was intolerant, rude and thoughtless.
It has nothing to do with liberal or conservative, it's about money and how much can be made by pumping poison into the veins of the consumer via the internet, radio or tv.
It's why a company like Clear Channel, for example, owns a lot of radio stations. They can apply their model across the board into different markets and since there is no competition, with them buying it all up, there is no one to call them out or challenge them.
Same concept here.
For every liberal outlet, I can name a conservative one.
The other day I mistakenly had on some AM radio station and I knew it was a right wing nutjob one because I heard the guy saying the Egyptian Revolution from a few years ago was supported by Obama because it meant the Muslim Brotherhood "candidate" being elected.
It's that kind of disingenuous analysis that creeps people out. Someone either believes that garbage or has been brainwashed to believe it. Either way, it's a problem in our society because the customers/voters are out there. SOmeone is listening to that and agreeing.
I am just going to walk away from this topic and have great discussion about the Pats with you
What did I do now?
You have done nothing wrong! You are fine.
I really don't like to talk too much politics here. The only way that i think I can leave politics behind me on this is for me not to get into a debate. And if i answer then we get into a debate. So the only way is for me to walk away with both of us being fine.
I come here for escape, and talking politics via txt, never seems to end up well.- Too tough a medium for that here.
I enjoy hearing your points of view, agree alot, dont some too, but you are interesting.
have a good one


text:
AUGUSTA — The South Atlantic League baseball game between the Charleston RiverDogs and Augusta GreenJackets scheduled for Saturday was postponed by rain. The game will be made up as part of a doubleheader on Sunday, with the first of two seven-inning games set to begin at 1:05 p.m. at Lake Olmstead Stadium.
The RiverDogs (47-36 overall) and GreenJackets (46-38) are both 8-7 in the second half.
Charleston will send left-hander Evan Rutckyj (7-5, 4.93 ERA) to the mound to face Augusta RHP Chris Stratton (7-3, 3.81) in Game 1. In the second game, RHP Vicente Campos (1-2, 4.02) will get the nod for Charleston, while Augusta will start RHP Joe Biagini (6-2, 4.06).
Notice about comments:
The Post and Courier is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point.
We do not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click the X that appears in the upper right corner when you hover over a comment. This will send the comment to Facebook for review. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Read our full terms and conditions.


text:
Hide your dogs and cats! Michael Vick is a free man. His sentence arising out of a conviction on federal dog-fighting charges has ended. He is now free to make his case for reinstatement to the NFL. Vick had previously been released from Federal prison to home-confinement but was required to wear an electronic ankle monitor. He can now walk without a limp as that requirement has ended.
It is being reported that Vick will work with the Humane Society of the United States on anti dog-fighting campaigns.
It is a given that Vick will seek to re-enter the NFL. It has been reported that he could return to professional football as soon as September if reinstated by the NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. I frankly do not see that happening. NFL Commissioner Goodell will certainly want his own "stupid mouth" probationary period. That is a time frame long enough to see if Vick does or says anything stupid that would be in conflict with a claim of rehabilitation and remorse.
There will also be opposition from animal rights groups and animal lovers in general. I count myself among the animal lovers. Many would even consider me a "radical" animal lover. I am both anti-hunting and horse racing. Do not however, count me among the opposition to Michael Vick being allowed to again play professional football.
When the time comes, should Roger Goodell find that Vick is in compliance with internal NFL conduct guidelines, I believe he should re-instate Vick's eligibility to play and seek NFL employment under whatever probationary terms he deems appropriate.
Anyone who knows me is probably shocked as hell to read this. I have been active in various animal rights causes and benefits. I screamed loudest for Vick's head on a doggie platter and a long prison sentence. I was disappointed when his state sentence ran concurrent with his federal sentence although as an attorney I was expecting just that.
I do not like Michael Vick. I think he is a gangster thug. I admit that I have never met him. It does not matter. In my mind it is res ipsa loquitur. If you abuse animals or take pleasure from watching them abused that is all I need to know. You are a bad person and a gangster thug. End of story.
I believe Michael Vick will again end up in trouble with the law. Why? I believe that anyone who abuses animals or takes pleasure in watching them abused has on a certain level, a sociopath personality. That person lacks the mental mechanism to understand societal values. This moral disconnect will more often than not lead to long term trouble. You can't grow a conscience regardless of any explanation for not having one.
With all that being said how could I possibly support Michael Vick?
I support Micheal Vick being allowed to seek employment in the NFL because I respect our justice system and the equality of judgment it is supposed to represent, even if it often does not always work out that way. Michel Vick was judged. He is paying his debt born out of that judgment. Once that happens, our Constitution and justice system mandates that while we can hold opinions, express them and judge him as a person, we can no longer legally judge his act.
I am comfortable enough in my convictions in this area to know that I would never hire someone who did what he did to work for me in any capacity. You have the right to ask me for a job. I have the right to say no. I have the right to bring my moral compass into play in saying no. You have the right to find someone else to hire you in the same type of job who may view things differently than I do.
Michael Vick has paid his legal dues to society. He should not have to pay them again in being denied the right to seek employment. I know there will be an NFL owner or two who does not view Michael Vick the same way I do. The NFL is too competitive and the margin of error too small. A team will give him a chance. I won't like it. I however am not society's moral gatekeeper. The NFL and individual team owners will decide which way their own compass points.
I will say that whoever hires Michael Vick had better hope that somewhere deep inside himself he has found the guilt ridden emotions that help shape the human conscience. If he has not, it is a given that he will be judged again.


text:
The subsidized private health insurance exchanges created by the new health care law are going to do a very poor job of providing affordable health care to the low income Americans they are meant to serve, according to a new draft report to the Connecticut General Assembly from the Sustinet Health Partnership Board of Directors. From the report (PDF):
However, we were troubled by the limits on ACA subsidies for adults with incomes above 138 percent FPL, who fall outside the legislation's increase in required Medicaid eligibility. Subsidies for coverage in the exchange will leave these adults facing significant costs […]
Considerable evidence suggests that cost-sharing imposed on low-income households can deter enrollment into coverage and prevent utilization of essential services, with potentially significant adverse effects on patient health. We were thus concerned about the impact of cost-sharing on two groups: 16,000 HUSKY parents with incomes between 138 and 185 percent FPL, who today receive comprehensive benefits and are not charged premiums or copayments; and 41,000 other low-income adults with incomes between 138 and 200 FPL, many of whom will be unable to afford what they will be charged in the exchange.
While the new law uses a mandate to require low income individuals to spend their money to buy something labeled "health insurance", the small subsidies, lack of tough cost control, and the allowed level of cost sharing will make getting necessary health care unaffordable.
Fortunately, thanks to an amendment from Sen. Marie Cantwell (D-WA), states can instead created a "basic health plan" program for these people. The state would get 95% of the money the government would otherwise use on subsidies to finance this program. The Board is recommending Connecticut pursue this alternative. From the report (PDF):
To be clear, we would not recommend implementing the Basic Health option if the state provided no more than the minimum level of coverage required by federal law. Rather, the purpose of our proposed BH implementation is two-fold: to preserve, for populations covered by current law, HUSKY's existing affordability and comprehensiveness of coverage, so that, from the member's perspective, benefits would be exactly what Medicaid now provides; and to extend that same level of assistance to other low-income, uninsured adults.
One disadvantage of providing HUSKY rather than subsidies in the exchange is that provider payment rates are now much lower in HUSKY than in the kind of commercial coverage likely to be offered in the exchange. While we believe that, for this particular population, access to care is typically impaired more by cost-sharing than by HUSKY's provider participation limits, the BH option allows a modest improvement of provider payment rates at no cost to the General Fund. According to Dr. Gruber's modeling, federal BH payments will exceed HUSKY costs for low-income adults by at least 7 to 13 percent. Accordingly, as the state uses BH to extend HUSKY, in its current configuration of covered benefits, cost-sharing rules, and consumer safeguards, to adults with incomes up to 200 percent FPL, the excess of federal BH payments over baseline HUSKY costs should be used to raise reimbursement rates for adults with incomes above 138 percent FPL.
Not only would this approach make coverage and care more affordable for low-income adults, it would also save money for the state General Fund.
This report demonstrates what a horrible deal the system of subsidized, loosely-regulated private health insurance exchanges is for both the uninsured and the taxpayers. Using a public health insurance program, the state of Connecticut will be able to provide low income Americans a higher level of coverage at lower personal cost and it will still have a lower overall price tag for the government.
The only entities for whom the design of private exchanges is a good deal are the drug companies, hospitals, and private insurance companies. The exchanges assure customers for the unnecessary private insurance middlemen. Loose regulation of the exchanges prevents the government from using the market power of a large pool to negotiate with the drug companies and hospitals for lower prices, and so they get higher reimbursement fees.
Hopefully, Connecticut will adopt the suggestion to use a publicly run insurance version of the Basic Health Program and other states will follow their lead.


text:
Talk:Spam blacklist
|←Requests and proposals
|Spam blacklist
|Archives (current)→
associated page is used by the MediaWiki Spam Blacklist extension, and lists regular expressions which cannot be used in URLs in any page in Wikimedia Foundation projects (as well as many external wikis). Any meta administrator can edit the spam blacklist; either manually or with SBHandler. For more information on what the spam blacklist is for, and the processes used here, please see Spam blacklist/About.
Please sign your posts with ~~~~ after your comment. This leaves a signature and timestamp so conversations are easier to follow.
Completed requests are marked as {{added}}/{{removed}} or {{declined}}, and are generally archived quickly. Additions and removals are logged · current log 2015/07.
- Information
- List of all projects
- Overviews
- Reports
- Wikimedia Embassy
- Project portals
- Country portals
- Tools
- Spam blacklist
- Title blacklist
- Vandalism reports
- Closure of wikis
- Interwiki map
- Requests
- Permissions
- Bot flags
- Logos
- New languages
- New projects
- Username changes
- Usurpation request
- Translations
- Speedy deletions
- snippet for logging
- {{sbl-log|12944424#{{subst:anchorencode:SectionNameHere}}}}
- 1 Proposed additions
- 2 Proposed additions (Bot reported)
- 3 Proposed removals
- 4 Troubleshooting and problems
- 5 Discussion
Proposed additions[edit]
|This section is for proposing that a website be blacklisted; add new entries at the bottom of the section, using the basic URL so that there is no link (example.com, not http://www.example.com). Provide links demonstrating widespread spamming by multiple users on multiple wikis. Completed requests will be marked as {{added}} or {{declined}} and archived.
Link is located on the SURBL list. Take note: SURBL Blacklist lookup and WOT Scorepage. Anarchyte 10:28, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
- Copied form enWP blacklist requests: site is linked from multiple projects. JzG (talk) 12:32, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
See here for IPs. Used cross-wiki. Jr Mime (talk) 00:16, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
- Added, reverted once, not loosing the time reverting over and over again drug spam. Thanks. —MarcoAurelio 14:11, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Waiting until report is generated to decide what to do with it. —MarcoAurelio 14:08, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
- Declined for now. Seems they stopped. Addittions reverted. —MarcoAurelio 19:39, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
nflhistory.net & mediaupdate19.com[edit]
The first domain redirects to the second which is a malicious site containing malware. I removed 140 links from articles yesterday. Please see this thread at WP:AN on en.wiki.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 12:48, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
- Added --Herby talk thyme 12:55, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
URL shortener. MER-C (talk) 12:42, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
- Added --Herby talk thyme 12:50, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Proposed additions (Bot reported)[edit]
|This section is for domains which have been added to multiple wikis as observed by a bot.
These are automated reports, please check the records and the link thoroughly, it may report good links! For some more info, see Spam blacklist/Help#COIBot_reports. Reports will automatically be archived by the bot when they get stale (less than 5 links reported, which have not been edited in the last 7 days, and where the last editor is COIBot).
The LinkWatchers report domains meeting the following criteria:
- When a user mainly adds this link, and the link has not been used too much, and this user adds the link to more than 2 wikis
- When a user mainly adds links on one server, and links on the server have not been used too much, and this user adds the links to more than 2 wikis
- If ALL links are added by IPs, and the link is added to more than 1 wiki
- If a small range of IPs have a preference for this link (but it may also have been added by other users), and the link is added to more than 1 wiki.
COIBot's currently open XWiki reports
Proposed removals[edit]
|This section is for proposing that a website be unlisted; please add new entries at the bottom of the section.
Remember to provide the specific domain blacklisted, links to the articles they are used in or useful to, and arguments in favour of unlisting. Completed requests will be marked as {{removed}} or {{declined}} and archived.
See also /recurring requests for repeatedly proposed (and refused) removals.
This site offers good independent information about the Syrian civil war and it doesn't contain spam or anything like that. Honestly, I don't even know why it was put on the list in the first place but I would like to see it on the green so people can use it as reference in their articles about this conflict.
- Seems to be collateral damage for a regex response to spam. We can probably do a lookbehind regex fix for this. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:01, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Collateral damage from some of the Chinese knockoff regexes -- whitelisting request. I'd rather have this addressed here. MER-C (talk) 12:29, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
- The rule is 'jerseys?(mvp|-)?(nba|shops?|goods|whole|wholesale|soho|release|zones|sale|com|pick|cn|export|supply|trade|site|warehouse|stop|faves|4u|kk|cc|ab|usa|outlets?|clubhouse|only|buy|planet|911)\.(com|us|org|net)\b' (my bolding) - not sure how to exclude jerseyusa.net from such a complicated rule - except if we split it into 'jerseys?(mvp|-)?(nba|shops?|goods|whole|wholesale|soho|release|zones|sale|com|pick|cn|export|supply|trade|site|warehouse|stop|faves|4u|kk|cc|ab|outlets?|clubhouse|only|buy|planet|911)\.(com|us|org|net)\b' and 'jerseys?(mvp|-)?(nba|shops?|goods|whole|wholesale|soho|release|zones|sale|com|pick|cn|export|supply|trade|site|warehouse|stop|faves|4u|kk|cc|ab|usa|outlets?|clubhouse|only|buy|planet|911)\.(com|us|org)\b'. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 08:48, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
- The whole thing gets regex'd anyway when the blacklist is applied, so just pull it out and do it separately. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:37, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
No idea why this website is blacklisted and I am new to this process but the link in question is the official website for the en:East Fishkill Fire District.--Zackmann08 (talk) 21:30, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
- This is caught by a complex regex, I'll work this one out. Approved. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:32, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
The website was blacklisted a few years ago - including regex term "sysoon" ( globally blacklisted by \bsysoon\b ) becose there is more international websites worldwide sysoon.com, sysoon.uk, sysoon.be, sysoon.de, etc... Please check if blacklist is necessary anymore, becose there is many userful information to use (funeral and cemeteries resource, more languages suport, easy and fast research). My research show that new owner is not using any bad practices. In 2012 and 2015 - WebbyAwards honoree, or see article Article: The rise of the e-funeral—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 11:58, 11 July 2015
- @184.108.40.206: We are not going to blanket unlist, one or several of these were spammed, hence the blanket blacklisting. It is possible to exclude one, or two, but there should be evidence that the sites are of use for Wikipedia, not whether blacklisting is still necessary - that is very difficult evidence to gather (if even possible): we've had spammers return shortly after blacklisting rules were removed from the list. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:20, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
- Declined Not actually required on projects as far as I can see - could always be whitelisted locally if a project had a need for a link. Herby talk thyme 13:20, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Troubleshooting and problems[edit]
SBHandler broken[edit]
SBHandler seems to be broken - both Glaisher and I had problems that it stops after the closing of the thread on this page, but before the actual blacklisting. Do we have someone knowledgeable who can look into why this does not work? --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 04:08, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
User:Erwin - pinging you as the developer. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 04:16, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
- FYI when you created this section with the name "SBHandler", you prevented SBHandler from being loaded at all (see MediaWiki:Gadget-SBHandler.js "Guard against double inclusions"). Of course, changing the heading won't fix the original issue you mentioned. But at least it will load now. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:30, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
- Another issue is that there's a bogus "undefined" edit summary when editing the SBL log. The customization of the script via our monobooks looks also broken. Thanks. — M 10:57, 06 December 2014 (UTC)
error block[edit]
www.jxlalk.com/888/d17/2013-11-06/1349.html 祝融八姓的新研究
- I do not find jxlalk.com in our global blacklist. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:45, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Test the link, it's matched by xlalk.com (without j). VT offers "clean". –Be..anyone (talk) 08:18, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- The rule is 'xlal[0-9a-z-]*\.com' .. that is going to be a very difficult one to whitelist, as I don't know what the original intent was to block (which may very well have included 'jxlala.com', so excluding only the 'j' is not the way forward). I would suggest that you get '\bjxlalk\.com\b' added to your local whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 08:38, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- Closed Please seek local whitelisting for the domain in question. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:26, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Bit of reference:
This was a rule that was removed after the 'blanket' xlal[0-9a-z-]*\.com was imposed. None of the additions are logged, but the '*' in the xlal-rule suggests that the string occured in multiple links with multiple characters after the xlal. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 04:31, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Another one, multiple domain spamming using open proxies back in the days. The problem with these wide rules is that it is difficult to see what should be covered and what we can 'let through'. Xlalu.com is defined as a malicious site by my internet filter. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 05:33, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- I reviewed the history of the blacklisting. See Talk:Spam_blacklist/About#Old_blacklisting_with_scanty_history. Xlalu.com is not registered at this time. Xlale.com is registered in China, and may not be connected with the original spammer, but the site is not functional anyway, it does not respond to pings.
- jxlalk.com shows no sign of being connected. The original spam was in a short period over 8 years ago, and was apparently not cross-wiki. This was before en.wiki had a spam blacklist, so all blacklisting was done here. This should not be on the spam blacklist. In 2008, the admin who added it attempted to remove all his listings, and that was reverted. Maybe it's time to clean this one up. If nothing else the original regex could be eliminated and the specific sites added, so that jxlalk.com is not caught. But I simply removing it is easiest and harmless. --Abd (talk) 01:35, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- xlalu is defined as a malicious site by my internet filter, and I am still not sure if it is only xlale and xlalu, it may have also been xlalk and xlulabd that have been spammed. I AGF on the admin who added the rules that there was a reason for its broadness. You may be very right that the current owner of the site may have nothing to do with the spam, it may also be that the past abuser did not have anything to do with the site, but was abusing the site to make some point here on Wikipedia. It is not always a site-owner that is the spammer, and for the more sophisticated spammers, it is likely not the site-owner that spams.
- I know that jxlalk.com does not show any sign of being connected, what I do see is just ONE wiki where ONE link is needed, and here a regex where exluding jxlalk.com specifically is giving a too difficult rule. And excluding specific domains from a rule is exactly why Wikis have a whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 05:53, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
... --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 05:58, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
This is a can of worms, I find now also dozens of 'domains' spammed by dozens of SPAs (open proxies?) - both deleted and existing diffs on many different pages. This shows that the IPs were active globally (this edit is clearly of the same type of the spamming edits on en.wikipedia, though here no links were included). My advice stays: whitelist it locally, or show me exactly what was abused and we might consider a narrowing-down, excluding some collateral damage (as I said earlier, xlulu.com gives me a 'malicious site'-warning, I don't think that wholesale removal is a good idea). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 06:13, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks, Beetstra. xlala.com would fit a reasonable pattern used by the spammers. It's a "domain for sale." Dropped twice. However, xlalu.com is dead, and was dropped four times (nobody owns the domain, so your browser is relying on something old, that probably was not the original spammed domain owner. After all, it's been over eight years). xlale.com is not an active site, and is unlikely to be the original owner either. It was dropped four times as well.
- The wikibooks link cited shows 220.127.116.11 as editing Wikibooks once, no spam. Global contributions show 5 edits with no visible relation to the xlale, xlalu, and xlala spammers. No spam, except one link [1] adding ひきこもり. How is this edit "of the same type of spamming edits on en.wikipedia"? We only have seen Contributions/184.108.40.206. The IP on enwiki added "Cool site!" followed by a series of links that could be highly deceptive, i.e., imitating real insurance company pages. Obviously, you may have seen more than that, but the Wikibooks IP added "Hi, you have very good site! Thank you!" This IP shows zero sign of being a spammer. The single link added is not blacklisted.
- Yes, if there were a substantial reason to continue the blacklisting, then the whitelisting solution would make some sense. However, whitelisting is quite impractical for most users. I've researched problem blacklistings, and saw what happened with users. Very few will request a whitelisting, they just give up. And for some of those who do, the request sits for months. Many admins are clueless about the whole process, not to mention users.
- Beetstra, I think you have never understood this. You see one request from one wiki. For every one request, there are likely dozens or more users frustrated who just give up. Ordinary users do not come to meta for delisting requests, especially if English is not their language. --Abd (talk) 21:11, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- The diff I gave uses the same language, same edit summary as the spammers, that editor is the cross-wiki spammer, the same person. The diff you gave on ja.wikipedia is not the spammer, it is a physically different person. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:22, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- "I've researched problem blacklistings, and saw what happened with users. Very few will request a whitelisting, they just give up." .. HOW do you know that a user gives up in stead of requesting whitelisting/deblacklisting. If you know it is a 'problem blacklisting' (as you call it), someone must have .. gone through the point of mentioning that it was a problem (e.g. ask for de-listing/whitelisting), otherwise you do not know what the intention was of the editor who ran into the blacklisting, you don't even know whether users ran into the rule. 'For every one request, there are likely dowzens or more users frustrated who just give up'. Yet, ZERO evidence that even one user ran into the rule, or, if users ran into the rule, that they were not actually spammers trying to add the link. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 05:22, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- We're done again, you found it necessary to make it personal again (as usual defense in these threads), ánd make yet more sweeping statements without evidence. If someone else has something substantial to add we can discuss further. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:22, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Removed, per provided evidence of no 'spammy hits'. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 07:06, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
- For reference: m:Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archive/Ukrainian_paper-writing_spam. That rule may indeed be too broad, maybe the two requests below should go on meta for an exclusion onto the rule. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:04, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
For the article Lausanne Palace, I would like to use the official website www.lausanne-palace.com which is blocked because it contains "palace.com". Can you please allow this page? Johndrew Andson (talk) 18:11, 15 April 2015 (UTC).
For the article List of Internet exchange points, I would like to use the official website www.host-palace.com which is blocked because it contains "palace.com". Can you please allow this page? --Never stop exploring (talk) 01:53, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Discussion regarding palace.com[edit]
Above copied from en:MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist#palace.com. Suggest to 'whitelist' these through exclusion of the two prefixes 'lausanne-' and 'host-' onto \bpalace\.com\b. Posting here to get reports for analysis. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 17:13, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
- I think that we would do well to either just remove the term or make it so that it is the whole term, ie. look to better blacklisting if required. It looks to be a pretty crude attempt to manage a dictionary word that could be prepended with many terms. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:28, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
"4gk.com"'s regexp to be clarified[edit]
Hi. Please clarify
\b4gk\.com\b to something which won't be triggered by "4gk.com.ua". Similar to this case. Thanks. --Base (talk) 12:49, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
- Any progress? Come on guys it's just edit with example given and you are already doing it for over 2 weeks. --Base (talk) 16:00, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
- Done Negative lookahead added to the regex. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:11, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
derefer.unbubble.eu deblock[edit]
This authority is used 24.923 times in main space in dewiki!. It is used to clean up Special:Linksearch from known dead links, by redirecting them over this authority. It is hard to find a better solution for this task. --Boshomi (talk) 16:38, 24 July 2015 (UTC) Ping:User:BillinghurstBoshomi (talk) 16:49, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- Please notice Phab:T89586, while not fixed, it is not possible to find the links with standard special:LinkSearch. in dewiki we can use giftbot/Weblinksuche instead.--Boshomi (talk) 18:04, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- afaics derefer.unbubble.eu could be used to circumvent the SBL, is that correct? -- seth (talk) 21:30, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- I don't think so, the redircted URL is unchanged, so the SBL works like the achive-URLs to the Internet Archive. --Boshomi (talk) 07:44, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
- It is not a stored/archived page at archive.org, it is a redirect service as clearly stated at the URL and in that it obfuscates links. To describe it in any other way misrepresents the case, whether deWP uses it for good or not. We prevent abuseable redirects from other services due to the potential for abuse. You can consider whitelisting the URL in w:de:MediaWiki:spam-whitelist if it is a specific issue for your wiki. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:09, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
- I don't think so, the redircted URL is unchanged, so the SBL works like the achive-URLs to the Internet Archive. --Boshomi (talk) 07:44, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
- afaics derefer.unbubble.eu could be used to circumvent the SBL, is that correct? -- seth (talk) 21:30, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Expert maintenance[edit]
One (soon) archived and rejected removal suggestion was about jxlalk.com matched by a filter intended to block xlalk.com. One user suggested that this side-effect might be as it should be, another user suggested that regular expressions are unable to distinguish these cases, and nobody has a clue when and why xlalk.com was blocked. I suggest to find an expert maintainer for this list, and to remove all blocks older than 2010. The bots identifying abuse will restore still needed ancient blocks soon enough, hopefully without any oogle matching google cases. –Be..anyone (talk) 00:50, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- No, removing some of the old rules, before 2010 or even before 2007, will result in further abuse, some of the rules are intentionally wide as to stop a wide range of spamming behaviour, and as I have argued as well, I have 2 cases on my en.wikipedia list where companies have been spamming for over 7 years, have some of their domains blacklisted, and are still actively spamming related domains. Every single removal should be considered on a case-by-case basis. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:42, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Just to give an example to this - redirect sites have been, and are, actively abused to circumvent the blacklist. Some of those were added before the arbitrary date of 2010. We are not going to remove those under the blanket of 'having been added before 2010', they will stay blacklisted. Some other domains are of similar gravity that they should never be removed. How are you, reasonably, going to filter out the rules that never should be removed. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:52, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- By the way, you say ".. intended to block xlalk.com .." .. how do you know? --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:46, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- I know that nobody would block
icrosoft.comif what they mean is
microsoft.com, or vice versa. It's no shame to have no clue about regular expressions, a deficit we apparently share. –Be..anyone (talk) 06:14, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- I am not sure what you are referring to - I am not native in regex, but proficient enough. The rule was added to block, at least, xlale.com and xlalu.com (if it were ONLY these two, \bxlal(u|e)\.com\b or \bxlal[ue]\.com\b would have been sufficient, but it is impossible to find this far back what all was spammed, possibly xlali.com, xlalabc.com and abcxlale.com were abused by these proxy-spammers. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 08:50, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- I know that nobody would block
- xlalk.com may have been one of the cases, but one rule that was blacklisted before this blanket was imposed was 'xlale.com' (xlale.com rule was removed in a cleanout-session, after the blanket was added). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 04:45, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- The dots in administrative domains and DNS mean something, notably
foo.bar.exampleis typically related to an administrative
bar.exampledomain (ignoring well-known exceptions like
co.uketc., Mozilla+SURBL have lists for this), while
foobar.examplehas nothing to do with
bar.example. –Be..anyone (talk) 06:23, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- I know, but I am not sure how this relates to this suggested cleanup. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 08:50, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- If your suggested clean-ups at some point don't match jxlalk.com the request by a Chinese user would be satisfied—as noted all I found out is a VirusTotal "clean", it could be still a spam site if it ever was a spam site.
- The regexp could begin with "optionally any string ending with a dot" or similar before xlalk. There are "host name" RFCs (LDH: letter digit hyphen) up to IDNAbis (i18n domains), they might contain recipes. –Be..anyone (talk) 16:56, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- What suggested cleanups? I am not suggesting any cleanup or blanket removal of old rules. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:50, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- I know, but I am not sure how this relates to this suggested cleanup. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 08:50, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- The dots in administrative domains and DNS mean something, notably
- I have supported delisting above, having researched the history, posted at Talk:Spam_blacklist/About#Old_blacklisting_with_scanty_history. If it desired to keep xlale.com and xlalu.com on the blacklist (though it's useless at this point), the shotgun regex could be replaced with two listings, easy peasy. --Abd (talk) 01:42, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- As I said earlier, are you sure that it is only xlale and xlalu, those were the two I found quickly, there may have been more, I do AGF that the admin who added the rule had reason to blanket it like this. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:50, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- Of course I'm not sure. There is no issue of bad faith. He had reason to use regex, for two sites, and possibly suspected additional minor changes would be made. But he only cited two sites. One of the pages was deleted, and has IP evidence on it, apparently, which might lead to other evidence from other pages, including cross-wiki. But the blacklistings themselves were clearly based on enwiki spam and nothing else was mentioned. This blacklist was the enwiki blacklist at that time. After enwiki got its own blacklist, the admin who blacklisted here attempted to remove all his listings. This is really old and likely obsolete stuff. --Abd (talk) 20:07, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- 3 at least. And we do not have to present a full case for blacklisting (we often don't, per en:WP:BEANS and sometimes privacy concerns), we have to show sufficient abuse that needs to be stopped. And if that deleted page was mentioned, then certainly there was reason to believe that there were cross-wiki concerns.
- Obsolete, how do you know? Did you go through the cross-wiki logs of what was attempted to be spammed? Do you know how often some of the people active here are still blacklisting spambots using open proxies? Please stop with these sweeping statements until you have fully searched for all evidence. 'After enwiki got its own blacklist, the admin who blacklisted here attempted to remove all his listings.' - no, that was not what happened. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:16, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hi!
- I searched all the logs (Special:Log/spamblacklist) of several wikis using the regexp entry /xlal[0-9a-z-]*\.com/.
- There were almost no hits:
- Of course I'm not sure. There is no issue of bad faith. He had reason to use regex, for two sites, and possibly suspected additional minor changes would be made. But he only cited two sites. One of the pages was deleted, and has IP evidence on it, apparently, which might lead to other evidence from other pages, including cross-wiki. But the blacklistings themselves were clearly based on enwiki spam and nothing else was mentioned. This blacklist was the enwiki blacklist at that time. After enwiki got its own blacklist, the admin who blacklisted here attempted to remove all his listings. This is really old and likely obsolete stuff. --Abd (talk) 20:07, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
w:ca: 0 w:ceb: 0 w:de: 0 w:en: 1: 20131030185954, xlalliance.com w:es: 1: 20140917232510, xlalibre.com w:fr: 0 w:it: 0 w:ja: 0 w:nl: 0 w:no: 0 w:pl: 0 w:pt: 0 w:ru: 0 w:sv: 0 w:uk: 0 w:vi: 0 w:war: 0 w:zh: 1: 20150107083744, www.jxlalk.com
- So there was just one single hit at w:en (not even in the main namespace, but in the user namespace), one in w:es, and one in w:zh (probably a false positive). So I agree with user:Abd that removing of this entry from the sbl would be the best solution. -- seth (talk) 18:47, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
- Finally an argument based on evidence (these logs should be public, not admin-only - can we have something like this in a search-engine, this may come in handy in some cases!). Consider removed. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 06:59, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
- By the way, Seth, this is actually no hits - all three you show here are collateral. Thanks for this evidence, this information would be useful on more occasions to make an informed decision (also, vide infra). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 07:25, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
- I am not sure that we want the Special page to be public, though I can see some value in being able to have something at ToolLabs to be available to run queries, or something available to be run through quarry. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:57, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
- Why not public? There is no reason to hide this, this is not BLP or COPYVIO sensitive information in 99.99% of the hits. The chance that this is non-public information is just as big as for certain blocks to be BLP violations (and those are visible) ... --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 04:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- I am not sure that we want the Special page to be public, though I can see some value in being able to have something at ToolLabs to be available to run queries, or something available to be run through quarry. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:57, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
- So there was just one single hit at w:en (not even in the main namespace, but in the user namespace), one in w:es, and one in w:zh (probably a false positive). So I agree with user:Abd that removing of this entry from the sbl would be the best solution. -- seth (talk) 18:47, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Now restarting the original debate[edit]
As the blacklist is long, and likely contains rules that are too wide a net and which are so old that they are utterly obsolete (or even, may be giving collateral damage on a regular basis), can we see whether we can set up some criteria (that can be 'bot tested'):
- Rule added > 5 years ago.
- All hits (determined on a significant number of wikis), over the last 2 years (for now: since the beginning of the log = ~1.5 years) are collateral damage - NO real hits.
- Site is not a redirect site (should not be removed, even if not abused), is not a known phishing/malware site (to protect others), or a true copyright violating site. (this is hard to bot-test, we may need s.o. to look over the list, take out the obvious ones).
We can make some mistakes on old rules if they are not abused (remove some that actually fail #3) - if they become a nuisance/problem again, we will see them again, and they can be speedily re-added .. thoughts? --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 07:25, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
- @@Hoo man: you have worked on clean up before, some of your thoughts would be welcomed. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:53, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
- Doing this kind of clean up is rather hard to automatize. What might be working better for starters could be removing rules that didn't match anything since we started logging hits. That would presumably cut down the whole blacklist considerably. After that we could re-evaluate the rest of the blacklist, maybe following the steps outlined above. - Hoo man (talk) 13:33, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
- Not hitting anything is dangerous .. there are likely some somewhat obscure redirect sites on it which may not have been attempted to be abused (though, also those could be re-added). But we could do test-runs easily - just save a cleaned up copy of the blacklist elsewhere, and diff them against the current list, and see what would get removed.
- Man, I want this showing up in the RC-feeds, then LiWa3 could store them in the database (and follow redirects to show what people wanted to link to ..). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- Hi!
- I created a table of hits of blocked link additions. Maybe it's of use for the discussion: User:lustiger_seth/sbl_log_stats (1,8 MB wiki table).
- I'd appreciate, if we deleted old entries. -- seth (talk) 22:12, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, thank you for this, it gives a reasonable idea. Do you know if the rule-hits were all 'correct' (for those that do show that they were hit) or mainly/all false-positives (if they are false-positive hitting, we could based on this also decide to tighten the rule to avoid the false-positives). Rules with all-0 (can you include a 'total' score) would certainly be candidates for removal (though still determine first whether they are 'old' and/or are nono-sites before removal). I am also concerned that this is not including other wikifarms - some sites may be problematic on other wikifarms, or hitting a large number of smaller wikis (which have less control due to low admin numbers). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:36, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
- Hi!
- We probably can't get information of false positives automatically. I added a 'sum' column.
- Small wikis: If you give me a list of the relevant ones, I can create another list. -- seth (talk) 10:57, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the sum-column. Regarding the false-positives, it would be nice to be able to quickly see what actually got blocked by a certain rule, I agree that that then needs a manual inspection, but the actual number of rules with zero hits on the intended stuff to be blocked is likely way bigger than what we see.
- How would you define the relevant small wikis - that is depending on the link that was spammed? Probably the best is to parse all ~750 wiki's, make a list of rules with 0 hits, and a separate list of rules with <10 hits (and including there the links that were blocked), and exclude everything above that. Then these resulting rules should be filtered by those which were added >5 years ago. That narrows down the list for now, and after a check for obvious no-no links, those could almost be blanket-removed (just excluding the ones with real hits, the obvious redirect sites and others - which needs a manual check). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 06:59, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
- Hi!
- At User:Lustiger_seth/sbl_log_stats/all_wikis_no_hits there's a list containing ~10k entries that never triggered the sbl during 2013-sep and 2015-feb anywhere (if my algorithm is correct).
- If you want to get all entries older than 5 years, then it should be sufficent to use only the entries in that list until (and including)
- So we could delete ~5766 entries. What do think? Shall we give it a try? -- seth (talk) 17:06, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
- The question is, how many of those are still existing redirect sites etc. Checking 5800 is quite a job. On the other hand, with LiWa3/COIBot detecting - it is quite easy to re-add them. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 19:28, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, thank you for this, it gives a reasonable idea. Do you know if the rule-hits were all 'correct' (for those that do show that they were hit) or mainly/all false-positives (if they are false-positive hitting, we could based on this also decide to tighten the rule to avoid the false-positives). Rules with all-0 (can you include a 'total' score) would certainly be candidates for removal (though still determine first whether they are 'old' and/or are nono-sites before removal). I am also concerned that this is not including other wikifarms - some sites may be problematic on other wikifarms, or hitting a large number of smaller wikis (which have less control due to low admin numbers). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:36, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
COIBot Report Saving update[edit]
After another scheme update in the api, the bot was starting to throw a double error in saving, invalidating/blanking reports and not being able to fill the XWiki table. Upon finding the mistakingly closed reports, I noticed that that also happened back in 2010. I have therefore reverted a good handful of XWiki reports to the pre-error state (effectively reopening them) and have the bot reparse them (most will automatically close). In repairing the problem I did also note another 'error' - the bot would close reports for redirect sites if autoclose criteria were met, while some of those should simply be blacklisted anyway (real redirect sites), or LiWa3 should be told on-IRC to ignore the redirect detection for these domains ('link nr add ..' for the 'official domains' which nonetheless are redirected like 'facebook.de' to 'facebook.com') - in other words, they need always human interaction). I think I have solved these problems now.
There is now a category Category:Problematic XWiki reports, where the {{LinkStatus}} is 'unset'. For the reports in there, I look at the history and revert to the last 'open' state (having the bot close it; reverting reinstates some old data like users who added the link, that the bot will retain but which otherwise will be lost, and it adds blacklist rules and advertising IDs for the old reports), or if there is just one revid, I manually consider to open or immediately close it.
Please consider to have COIBot clear out its XWiki backlog, it will probably autoclose most of the ~95 open records (though there is no real harm in closing them manually). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 19:44, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- The bot is doing its job correctly now I think, so feel free to close the reports, especially the ones where COIBot is the last editor (it does leave more open now than usual). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 06:28, 24 April 2015 (UTC)