1

I think we need to have some type of direction for articles that we can get rid of immediately. Here are my suggestions. BP Tyler group Springhill care ANY Escort type articles Abney Associates Hong Kong Flowers Crown Financial Management Gurgaon anything Aypearl Newport Group/Newport International Group Bradley Associates Hass and Associates

2

Hongkong Flowers? (I usually delete them on the spot)

3

Thanks. Forgot about them!

4

‘Articles’ with a username or something totally erroneous like “Sleeping” as in How to Sleeping.

5

I think the ones listed above are some business promotion ones. There’s also articles that have a normal title but are about things like Louis Vuitton handbags. There used to be tons of articles advertising wedding dresses, although I haven’t seen any lately. Articles with spam and random keyboard characters should probably be deleted on the spot too.

6

Eh, I think those depend on the content. “Be Like” ones are usually tagged as nfd|cha and not speedy. (at least that’s what I do)

7

those would be nfd|cha for the most part.

8

Yeah, I was gonna say, the Hong Kong flower delivery articles; and any articles that are flower delivery - Delete them. (There are some besides the Hong Kong ones) June Days

9

It would depend on why you’re deleting them. If it’s for egregious spam then it’s already covered in the Deletion Policy, no questions need be asked.

10

Obviously, there does, as we keep seeing them in the NFD Guardian.

11

The problem might be two fold, I know a guy that looks a lot like the one above Teresa has redirected quite a few of the repeat spam articles to the deleted article and then protected the page, and if it is a multiple creation of the same nonsense topic, I try to do the same, which should slow the creation of some of the BP and Tyler Group topics down. As far as the articles ending up in the NFD guardian, if a recent changes patroller adds a conventional nfd temp and patrols the edit, it is possible the article won’t be seen again except in NAB or the NFD guardian tool. I have talked to a couple of the more active patrollers about adding ‘‘speedy’’ to the worst of them, but it hasn’t seemed like an urgent issue unless the nfd log is getting backed up?

12

it was at 300 earlier today

13

I don’t understand what you mean by categories. Leaving that crap on wH is not a good idea.

14

Agreed, we are not creating a new speedy category, we are trying to focus on specific spam articles, and spam articles are already a speey deletion ‘‘category’’, so to speak, not to mention, the speedy deletion for the Belgium BP articles and the included Tyler Group articles has already been discussed and accepted. The two things that set these apart are the fact they generally don’t have a useful “How to” name, and they are spamlinks front to back. Most are also copy paste copyright violations. I am not sure where an urgent level of nfd guardian articles would be, it does seem like 300 is not high, considering where the backlog once was with manual deletions. Either way, getting rid of these isn’t doing anyone a disservice but a bunch of spammers.

15

I have always felt like a lot of people are scared to speedy (or delete, for admins) articles and would rather NFD them and let somebody else deal with it, regardless of how much the article violates wikiHow policy. I know we are a democratic sort of site and, with deleting articles, everybody has a say in what happens, but there is no reason to leave a terrible article on the site longer than it needs to be on here, especially in the case of blatant spam or other nonsense. If there is really no way to form the title into a how-to article that fits into our policies, and the content sucks…the sooner it is gone, the better.

16

Knowing what to look for gives us an edge up. Those mentioned are known spammers

17

Yep! And this is very helpful info, especially if you’re an admin whose time on site is sporadic. Thanks Teresa (and all)!

18

I suspect Crown Financial Management belongs in this group, there are several new articles this morning that are simply link farms (and copyviobot hits) from ‘‘new’’ users, all with the same M. O., an advertising sounding name, a bunch of links, and pretty much nothing else.

19

Have updated the list

20

I hope that patroller’s won’t be timid about putting a speedy on articles that are clearly spam or blatantly not a How-to. They should remember that Speedy’s are still reviewed by admins so the admin can change it to an NFD if they deem fit. Putting a speedy on an article is still not an automatic deletion. If it’s clearly a trash article I delete it on the spot when patrolling. I’ve seen this type of article come through the NFD guardian and wished it had been speedy’ed and not sat around for even 7 days. If it’s borderline or has even a remote chance of being saved I’ll NFD it. But there are articles that clearly don’t stand a chance.