@SmokeDetector tpu- all answers by this user are promoting the same product. In fact, 25 hits for the domain on the network. 15 hits on SO from 3 users (their only contributions), 7 hits on webapps.se from 3 users (one of those users has posted on SO), and 3 on softwarerecs.se from 1 user, and 1 on dba.se (one of those users has posted on webapps.se). Exactly 1 user has disclosed affiliation. custom flagged on all sites.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad ip for hostname in answer, bad keyword with a link in answer, blacklisted website in answer, potentially bad ns for domain in answer, potentially bad keyword in username (274): What point does Earth actually orbit? by fadil on astronomy.SE
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in body, bad keyword in link text in body, bad keyword in title, potentially bad ns for domain in body, blacklisted user (334): construction companies in Ernakulam by Abin on superuser.com (@Ollie)
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad ip for hostname in body, bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, blacklisted website in body, link at end of body, +3 more (590): How to use Prestige Keto? by RanaeHolden on meta.SE (@Ollie)
If it's plagiarized with random spam added and there's already a custom flag, then I'd definitely toss spam flags at it. Just so long as the custom flag is there so the handling moderator doesn't go "this looks like legitimate content"
@SurajRao They can but there's no guarantee that they will look at the comments. (This is specific to SO only, I don't really know what the norms are on other sites). In cases like this, as RyanM mentioned, a custom flag is preferable, since it may not be obvious.
@SurajRao Hmm, interesting. I think the guidance is to custom flag when it's plagiarized content + a spam link. At least, that's what I've been doing for these cases.
I think the guidance is just the standard "Is it obvious? Spam flag. Otherwise, custom flag (unless someone's already custom flagged, then spam flag)."
@tripleee That pattern looks like it's already caught by Bad keyword in answer and Bad keyword in body Append -force to the command if you really want to add this pattern.
Looks like all of https://stackexchange.com/users/23136292/tobacco-king?tab=accounts accounts are spam.
E.g. multiple users found on ruSO: https://ru.meta.stackoverflow.com/a/11819/176217
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Link at end of answer, potentially bad ip for hostname in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer, potentially bad keyword in username, username similar to website in answer (131): Redirecting Wordpress pages by Global Trade Plaza on stackoverflow.com
@tripleee That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in body and Potentially bad keyword in answer Append -force to the command if you really want to add this pattern.
@SmokeDetector tp- Undisclosed affiliation: both answers from this user promote store.webkul.com, and the display name contains "webkul" (custom flagged)
@tripleee Thanks, fortunately I mentioned that in the flag (my comment was the flag text) so hopefully the moderator handling it will check display name history if they don't trust me
@tripleee Warning that there are quite a lot of network FP for that (I went on a spree flagging NAAs linking it on Magento.SE until I ran out of flags)
@tripleee That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in body and Potentially bad keyword in answer Append -force to the command if you really want to add this pattern.
Looks like all of https://stackexchange.com/users/23136292/tobacco-king?tab=accounts accounts are spam.
E.g. multiple users found on ruSO: https://ru.meta.stackoverflow.com/a/11819/176217
