Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

I've just stumbled upon this answer at SU which links against a site with very poor reputation at WOT (including warnings for viruses, phishing and the like).

Should we replace those links, should we remove them or let them be?

share|improve this question
In doubt, always flag for moderator, I love checking the flags (this first week, at least). – Gnoupi Jul 13 '10 at 13:06
@Popular Demand: Oh yeah, sorry, Web of Trust...added link. – Time Traveling Bobby Jul 13 '10 at 18:41
Grazie! – Pops Jul 13 '10 at 18:53
up vote 3 down vote accepted
  1. Add a comment informing the OP. Encourage them to change the link themselves to something similar, but without the warnings (if possible). Temporarily edit out the link (if it is extraneous), or modified it as outlined below if it is critical to the post. Make sure you leave a comment that tells them what you modified.
    If it a new user, you might want to tell them how to edit their posts as well.

  2. My personal (completely unsanctioned) solution would be editing
    (ED: I received a spoofing alert from the following link.) http:_//

  3. If the link if formatted

    "an example found here"
    "an example found at the following link: (ED: I received a spoofing alert from the following link.) http:_//"

Replace "spoofing" with whatever warning you received.

share|improve this answer
I'm not sure I agree with "Make sure you give them ample time to do this", as a link to a spam, malware, or spyware site is a serious broken window, and just bad business. I don't want people saying "I went to and got a virus". I like your solution though. – C. Ross Jul 13 '10 at 13:27
@C. Ross: good point. edited. – devinb Jul 13 '10 at 13:58
edited the given example with something similar to your suggestion. I left the link available only to editors, it's not visible to the rest of users, and replaced by a notification like yours. Didn't leave a comment, since the "revision" in itself should be enough to notify. – Gnoupi Jul 13 '10 at 15:06
@Gnoupi, only if the poster knows how to edit and view revision history. But I agree, that link was sketchy. – devinb Jul 13 '10 at 15:14

If this DB is programmatically acceptable, then should the Stack Exchange engine automatically query it for all URLs submitted, and add an appropriate warning for suspect links?

share|improve this answer
There is a WOT API that allows you to programmatically obtain the "reputation" of a given site. T&Cs apply to it which may not be ideal for SO. This answer might be better off posted as a separate feature request. – Andy E Jul 13 '10 at 15:20
I agree with Andy. That would make a pretty interesting feature request...especially since most spammers would be also caught with it. – Time Traveling Bobby Jul 13 '10 at 21:31

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .