On 16/10/2007, Eric K <ek79501(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
I think making an IP do a captcha on its first edit
only would help. The captcha would keep a record of the most recent IP's in a table
and if an edit hasnt been recorded from them, give them a captcha, otherwise pass. This
may mean the IP table would grow large (may not be fast for large wikis with lots of
editing), but purge it a certain period (15 days etc). Captcha has to be there one way or
the other. This is least irritating.
I like the idea.
There is definitely no way to check if an edit is
spam or not, except for capthcha.
Not currently. I think a 'review for spam' feature would work very
well for most small sites.
Dan Bolser <dan.bolser(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 16/10/2007, Chuck wrote:
Has anybody found a solution for the gibberish
spam short of installing
captcha extensions?
Not here. I set anonymous edits to false and installed reCaptcha.
Installing reCaptcha doesn't really constitute a big change to the
wiki (its quite unobtrusive really), but disallowing anonymous edits
is a pain. This is especially true of pre 1.11.0 MW versions where
'view source' doesn't seem to work 'out of the box'.
In theory there should be a simple SQL query to detect these kinds of
spam (one nonsense word at the start of a page) - However, it seems
better to code a general solution that highlights potential spam for
review. Its keeping track of the potentially spammed pages that I find
most difficult.
Anyone handy with Bayesian filters? If we could rank edits by
'spaminess' using a Bayesian filter, and be given the option to review
the top n most spammy revisions (with feedback training) ... well...
that would be great!
Send all your edits to a gmail account and only allow those that get
forwarded back?
Chuck
2007(a)gmask.com wrote:
Yea I don't want to stop anonymous users but
it seems like that might
be neccessary.. or it would be great if you could captcha new posts
from either new users or unfamiliar IP's.
-Adrian
--- Chuck wrote:
Benjamin Horst wrote:
>I was experiencing the same types of "spam," or whatever it is.
>
>I started to enforce a captcha on every edit, which bothers me, but
stopped the junk. I hope there's a better solution out there!
>Thanks,
>Ben
We're having the same problem with our wikis. It seems that this
could
be solved if thereis a switch in MediaWiki that really mandates that
changes be made by registered users.
We are planning to implement the other spam measures mentioned on
this list.
Thanks to the advice from last week about how to stop DIV spam.
Chuck
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
MediaWiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
MediaWiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
--
--------------------------
Bread and Roses Web Design
serving small businesses, non-profits, artists and activists
http://www.breadandrosesweb.com/
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
MediaWiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
--
hello
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
MediaWiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
---------------------------------
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
MediaWiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
--
hello