like CheeseDreams? I am not necessarily advocating Nicholas' proposal,

I just think I'll note: I'm not really that worn down. So far I've blocked at least 6-7 CheeseDreams accounts. However, this should have been seen to be a problem when the following edit happened: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Historicity_of_Jesus&diff=716… Note the comment in the history. "Remove inusefor tag. Haven't finished, but really tired now. Will sort out the mess tommorrow." Then, check the state of the article! Yet when I reverted back due to an editor going into an EXTREMELY controversial article (even before CD edited this it was controversial!) and just taking away all the material.

I think that this diff really says it all about the whole situation: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Historicity_of_Jesus&diff=720… (before CheeseDreams and after CheeseDreams). TBSDY John Lee wrote: > I just thought I'd point out something from > [[User:UninvitedCompany]]'s user page - Wikipedia is a hundred times > smaller than MSN. When we're that big (which could definitely not be > too far in the future), we'll have a hundred CheeseDreams-like > editors. True, we'll have a hundred times more editors than we do now > to clean up the mess, but the question is, will we be able to put up > against a hundred editors using tactics like CheeseDreams? I am not > necessarily advocating Nicholas' proposal, but we should bear in mind > that a minute saved is a minute earned. A minute spent reverting > CheeseDreams could be a minute spent adding references to an article > or a minute spent wikifying a decent new article. CheeseDreams' > tactics of attrition are wearing us down, and it's doubtful whether a > hundred times more editors would be capable of dealing with a hundred > CheeseDreams. > > John Lee > ([[User:Johnleemk]])