[Wikipedia-l] vandalism spree

Tue Nov 19 18:05:37 UTC 2002

The Cunctator wrote:

>No, seriously,
>
Oh, how boring ;-)

> how about not blocking?
>
IMHO "don't block at all" won't work, but neither does "block everything 
at once", as we've seen.

>If you try to think of solutions to our problems that don't involve
>blocking, the solutions are generally much cleaner.
>
>For example,
>1. more powerful ways of searching and sorting edits,
>
We now have the "top" mark at user contributions, so we can see which 
edits haven't been reverted yet. What else could we use? I already 
suggested marking IP contributions on Recent Changes in red (or bold 
or...) for logged-in users, but was turned down as being "unfair" to the 
good contributors, which *are* the majority.

>2. more powerful ways of rolling back edits
>
How about a link on the user contributions, for sysops only probably, to 
undo all "top" contributions of this user?

>3. Bayesian filtering of contributions
>
That would be similar to the automatic "quality rating" I suggested earlier.
Characteristics could include:
* removal of large parts of the text
* insertion of repetetetetitive sequences
* insertion of certain keywords ("f**k")
* insertion of off-site links (?)
Suspicious edits could be highlighted on the Recent Changes page.

Magnus