[WikiEN-l] Quasi-protection policy proposal

[Anthony DiPierro]

On 5/27/06, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> I like it, but there's a big logistical burden lying in wait for us.
> (On the other hand, it would mean that an admin virtually has to
> eyeball each new user and leave them a friendly comment, which is a
> good thing)
>

I don't see how the time saved not having to block a small number of
vandals can possibly outweigh the time spent validating a large number
of good users.

> On the talk page, Jtdirl has quite a good idea - modify
> semi-protection to be "accounts where first edit was more than four
> days ago" rather than "accounts where creation was more than four days
> ago". Less logistics, but certainly a benefit to the sleeper problem.
>
You could always combine the two.  Auto-validate X days after Y edits
(say 2 and 10), or manually validate by an admin at any time.

Of course, there are relatively easy ways to get around this.  To stop
a well-written bot you have to block the IP address(es), not the
usernames.  But then you've gotta worry about collateral damage,
because IP blocks affect *everyone* who uses that IP (even admins, see
[[Wikipedia:Blocking policy proposal]]).

And that's really the fear.  Not the vandalism itself as it will
almost always get reverted.  Not even the waste of time, of admins and
regular reverting users, although that's up there.  But the real fear
is that the vandals are going to create a situation where good editors
can't edit, or have to cross very high hurdles to do so.  The fear is
the realization of what Nicholas Carr called "the death of Wikipedia"
(he was premature, but it's only a few well executed vandal attacks
away).

Anthony