This would make fighting spam easier and safer without needing to know regex or accidentally breaking wikis while also addressing the need to have some notes next to each domain on why it’s blocked. It would also make the list of blocked domains searchable and would make editing Wikis in general faster by optimizing matching links added against the blocked list in every edit (seephab:T337431#8936498 for some measurements).
Note that this new feature doesn’t support regex (for complex cases) nor URL paths matching. Also it doesn’t support bypass by spam whitelist. For those, please either keep usingMediaWiki:Spam-blacklist or switch to an abuse filter if possible. And adding a link to the list might take up to five minutes to be fully in effect (due to server-side caching, this is already the case with the old system) and admins and bots automatically bypass the blocked list.
Latest comment:1 year ago5 comments2 people in discussion
They were spamming on Wikipedia, later claimed that their account was hacked. They were blocked for having a compromised account. They have started editing Wikiversity. High risk of future vandalism. They should be blocked for having a compromised account, in spite of the fact that this is dubious, because of AGF.Janhrach (discuss •contribs)07:45, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Atcovi: They have not been active here since February, but they have made several edits across other wikis in the meantime. Their edits include highly visible vandalism, such as spamming in TemplateData. I would highly recommend a block.Janhrach (discuss •contribs)14:52, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment:1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion
aiCAMstir
TheaiCAMstir project is a non-commercial collaborative project on using Artificial Intelligence in Welding. We want to create a mirror of the www_aicamstir_com web site, before this will be taken down. We do not want to add the links to the project partners but include references to published papers. However, the software settings seems to restrict the use of web links, and recommended to get in touch with an admin (By the way, I am anexperienced Wikimedia user). Do you want to allow me, to insert weblinks into references?'aiCAMstir' (discuss •contribs)11:27, 1 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
You done that before,See here I do not have to address your 4 reasons, that is where a discussion/talk page is for. What Wikidebate Is Not: Explicitly, it's not a platform to defend preferred points of view (similar to WP:NOTSOAPBOX or WP:NOTFORUM). Focus on gathering all sides neutrally, not advocacy. This is not a discussion. Removing edits that you do not like in a debat is not doneHarold Foppele (discuss •contribs)14:41, 13 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
That is not true. I talked to you in 1. the edit summary and 2. on my talk page where you insisted "this is not a discussion" and that you don't need to address my 4 reasons. People are not free to dump anything they want onto pages and then have it stay there with reverts and removals being impossible. Contentious edits like that need consensus for inclusion or the removal reasons to be addressed. Your interaction has been very nonconstructive and hopefully this is not a wider phenomenon on the site which if so would cause massive quality problems.Prototyperspective (discuss •contribs)11:35, 15 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
You did mention it in the edit while deleting it. The 'contentious' comment is still there with an expansion to a subpage. It is not you who decide what is dump or not, or what is contentious, that is what custodians are for. A simple comment with a ping at the talk page or the user page would be sufficient to start a discussion and reach consensus. If no consensus is reached, the help of a custodian can be sought. You are not the discussion leader on the subject. Wikiversity lives by AGF (Assume Good Faith). So I assume that for you as well. I admire @Atcovi for a brilliant solution.Harold Foppele (discuss •contribs)12:24, 15 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
One can remove contents and the burden is on the person who wants to add the new info to address the reasons in a comment and/or to address the reasons via a new way. Adding it to a subpage and then linking that is what you could have done, not requiring me to go here to get help. You are not the discussion leader on the subject. You aren't free to add any content to any page and have authority for it to stay there. I'll once again close my comment that your interaction has not been constructive; you did not address points or suggest or implement a solution but just insisted you don't even need to address them and just went to do edit warring.Prototyperspective (discuss •contribs)12:59, 15 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
YDone by GV. —Atcovi(Talk -Contribs)16:33, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
NNot done user has not edited since February 2023, so for record-keeping purposes, I'm marking this request as stale. —Atcovi(Talk -Contribs)16:59, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Comment Page deleted.MathXplore (discuss •contribs)03:21, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
