[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Url in title, bad keyword in body, blacklisted website in body, blacklisted website in title, body starts with title and ends in url, +7 more (790): nutritionless.com/simply-turmeric/ by njtazkplsa on wordpress.SE
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in body, blacklisted website in body, link at end of body, link following arrow in body, pattern-matching website in body, +2 more (491): Fantastic Keto123654789 by fantasticketo on askubuntu.com
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Url in title, bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, body starts with title and ends in url, link at end of body, +4 more (491): medhush.com/level8-keto/ by tahboha12 on workplace.SE
Matched by the following regexes: ^.{0,3}wingding.{0,3}$ on line 140 of blacklisted_usernames.txt ^\w{0,3}w.{0,2}ng.?d.{0,2}ng\w{0,3}$ on line 5145 of watched_keywords.txt
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Url-only title, bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, body starts with title and ends in url, link at end of body, +5 more (594): medhush.com/level8-keto/ by wontw201 on askubuntu.com
> Bad keyword in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer ---------- Bad keyword in answer - Position 0-11: level8-keto Potentially bad keyword in answer - Position 7-11: keto
> Bad keyword in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer ---------- Bad keyword in answer - Position 14-26: /level8-keto Potentially bad keyword in answer - Position 22-26: keto
Matched by the following regexes: perfect\W?keto(?:\W?base)? on line 1676 of bad_keywords.txt keto\W*max(?:\W*\d+)? on line 1845 of bad_keywords.txt keto(?:nes?)? on line 4694 of watched_keywords.txt
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, body starts with title and ends in url, link at end of body, pattern-matching product name in body, +7 more (859): Keto Burn Xtreme by leroy fann on meta.SE
@Glorfindel That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in answer and Potentially bad keyword in body; append -force if you really want to do that.
@SmokeDetector An argument could be made that this is just NAA from a user that doesn't understand SE. However, it doesn't provide an answer and is requesting the OP to contact the user directly via email or phone in order to get the solution. It might be someone just willing to help of-site for free, but it could also be someone looking to have the OP pay them. I'd consider it something we'd want to block at the system level.
@SmokeDetector The user has another answer which also links the same blog. However, in that answer, they do disclose they wrote it. That other answer is poor, but slightly above NAA.
@Mithrandir I think I'm gonna FP it. The original reason isn't flagable and it is an attempt (if not ranty) to post an answer. It's also not copied content as far as I can tell
@SmokeDetector This links to the official site, which is where the major portion of the content is quoted from. The email address is the email address on the official site for WOW Air. While it's not in <blockquote>, it is in "".
@Makyen the post was deleted by a moderator, I am not sure if mod flagged or deleted it, but the flag was cleared, so I am going to leave a tpu- feedback. Probably the mod-flag which is going to be raised will be declined.
@double-beep You get to do what you'd like, but, IMO, the post should be considered FP, not TP. If a moderator on the site wants to delete it, they are obviously welcome to do so. However, from our point of view, the post answers the question, is not plagiarism, links to the official site, and gives an official email contact address.
@SmokeDetector @Makyen isn't that kinda strange, though? 2 posts within some minutes with almost exactly the same content (blockquotes added in the last one) and the one was upvoted too fast?
@double-beep Yeah, but we don't deal with voting/sockpuppetry here either. The point is they're direct quoting from the official website and it is an answer to the question
@double-beep It's a bit unusual, but there are a variety of possible explanations for the information to be reposted, either by the same user with an unregistered account, or another user that had happened to see the information.
The quick upvotes on the second are not surprising. Due to the SD report of both the earlier post and the 2nd one, along with the discussion here about the first one, the second got much more visibility than a normal post, and people had already evaluated nearly identical content, so quick upvotes are not a surprise. For instance, while I haven't upvoted the second one, I was/am tempted to do so.
@double-beep I don't know if the first was deleted by a moderator or some other method. I don't have enough rep on Travel to see deleted posts. Frankly, I don't see a reason for either of the travel posts to be deleted, if considered in isolation of each other. However, obviously, only one of the two is needed on the question.
@Machavity nope. I have heard that when a post gets tpu-, then one fp- while it is deleted, SD will raise a custom mod-flag asking mods to review the situation.
@SmokeDetector v All my fault. The post was deleted too fast and I didn't see the ✏️ icon.
@double-beep Yes, I see that it was deleted again. At a minimum, it needed to be unlocked, as it remained locked by Community. Did you mention that it might be a good idea to see if the two accounts were from the same user/IP?
@gparyani That pattern looks like it's already caught by Pattern-matching website in answer and Pattern-matching website in body; append -force if you really want to do that.
