Latest revision |
Your text |
Line 7: |
Line 7: |
| I freely admit that I want to raise the bar for editing information on a source I would like to consider 'reference'.<br> | | I freely admit that I want to raise the bar for editing information on a source I would like to consider 'reference'.<br> |
| [[User:lbt|lbt]] 16:23, 21 June 2008 (UTC) | | [[User:lbt|lbt]] 16:23, 21 June 2008 (UTC) |
- | :+1 from me. No anonymous edits seems like a fair balance between protecting the wiki and protecting spammer's rights to mess it up. --[[User:dneary|dneary]] 07:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
| |
- | :<del>+1. Spam is a serious problem. Registering or logging in is not.</del> (just saw [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Captcha MediaWiki's Manual:Combating spam] and was convinced by the discussion in maemo-developers) --[[User:qgil|qgil]] 11:47, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
| |
- | :+1. If you want to say something, say who you are first.--[[User:anidel|anidel]] 11:55, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | | |
| == Ban anonymous over HTTP, but not HTTPS == | | == Ban anonymous over HTTP, but not HTTPS == |
Line 19: |
Line 16: |
| Therefore, we should probably make that ban permanent and deny any anonymous access through HTTP; or we "fix" the problem and expose the external requesting IP to mediawiki over HTTP as well, and then move quickly to ban spamming IPs. Obviously, this will be ineffective if we are hit by a distributed spam botnet. | | Therefore, we should probably make that ban permanent and deny any anonymous access through HTTP; or we "fix" the problem and expose the external requesting IP to mediawiki over HTTP as well, and then move quickly to ban spamming IPs. Obviously, this will be ineffective if we are hit by a distributed spam botnet. |
| ''--[[User:jaffa|Jaffa]] 17:26, 21 June 2008 (UTC)'' | | ''--[[User:jaffa|Jaffa]] 17:26, 21 June 2008 (UTC)'' |
- | :Having said that, if there's a suitable CAPTCHA-type system or plugin we can easily deploy, that'd also be effective. However, if it's non-trivial, I wouldn't say the investment of effort in it was worthwhile (IMHO). --[[User:jaffa|Jaffa]] 17:30, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
| |
- |
| |
- | == Proposal ==
| |
- |
| |
- | This was a [http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-users/2008-June/021627.html proposal sent to maemo-users]. Proposing to continue the discussion here until agreement.--[[User:qgil|qgil]] 21:51, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
| |
- |
| |
- | Frantisek Dufka wrote:
| |
- | :The only argument left which I do agree with is additional work for
| |
- | :implementing captcha and fixing occasional vandalism if it won't be 100%
| |
- | :bulletproof. But maybe we already wasted more time in this dicussion
| |
- | :that it would take to implement this http://recaptcha.net/plugins/mediawiki/
| |
- |
| |
- | Probably true.
| |
- |
| |
- | Proposal: let's go for incremental changes until the satisfactory level.
| |
- |
| |
- | We had it fully open and we have seen that this is not good enough since
| |
- | we get spammed and this is just the beginning of a small and young wiki
| |
- | not much linked.
| |
- |
| |
- | Next step
| |
- |
| |
- | Ban anonymous over HTTP, but not HTTPS?
| |
- |
| |
- | : Done. --[[User:dneary|Dave Neary]] 11:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
| |
- |
| |
- | If this is not good enough then next step
| |
- |
| |
- | Captcha
| |
- |
| |
- | if this is not enough then registration.
| |
- |
| |
- | About anonymous contributors, I think a wiki doesn't compare to a
| |
- | mailing list or a bug report tool. A comma, a number, a vowel or a word
| |
- | might make a lot of sense and be a useful spontaneous contribution in a
| |
- | wiki. The same cannot be said in other media.
| |
- |
| |
- | Myself I have edited anonymously in several wikis just for minor fixes,
| |
- | and I wouldn't have registered to do so.
| |
- |
| |
- | I was already convinced by Jaffa, Frantisek and
| |
- | http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Captcha . Then
| |
- | https://wiki.maemo.org/index.php?title=Task%3AMaemo_brand&diff=2641&oldid=2502
| |
- | came as a proof. :)
| |