Forum:Concerning creation of new pages

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Concerning creation of new pages

Note: This topic has been unedited for 1889 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

A lot of new pages recently created have been "huffed" so how about requiring a login to create new pages, just like on Wikipedia?--Myrtonos (talk) 10:34, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Score

Score: -4

1.  Against. What we need is a proper and a limited restriction targeting spammers and vandals rather than restricting literally all.--The Pioneer 10:48, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

   Comment Remember, Wikipedia has that, and those contributing to that wiki don't seem to object to it.--Myrtonos (talk) 12:04, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

   Wikipedia and Uncyclopedia are different projects, and I think it's limited to English Wikipedia (not all WMF projects). I think they had a very long discussion to make them look good enough as the so-called experts before introducing such restriction, which is not the thing we would like to have in Uncyc IMO.--The Pioneer 12:29, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

   But Uncyclopedia is very much Wikipedia-inspired. Also, I didn't realise that non-English Wikipedias did allow anon users to create new pages.--Myrtonos (talk) 12:39, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

   As someone who has been following this wiki from a distance, Uncyclopedia does not have near as many contributors as Wikipedia. As previously stated, they are different projects. When Wikia put up a content warning, immediately the number of editors to the site dropped. Yes, some of those were likely spambots. But at this time, Uncyclopedia does not have the problem Wikipedia does of "too many cooks spoiling the stew". I would agree a different solution is needed here. -- Simsilikesims(♀UN) Talk here. 10:58, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

2.  Against. Just like all the Wikipedias and a lot of other sites out there, we already have AbuseFilter which is a magnificent tool for addressing most problems (but not human laziness). AF can be used to filter out most obvious nonsense/junk/whatever, provided you can rope someone into writing the filter(s) in question (or import them from a different wiki which already has such filters). -- Jack Phoenix, professional killer admin (Whine?) • (Wikia ♥ ads) 11:26, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
3. An alternative would be to moderate pages created by anon users, they would only be publically viewable after approval by administrators.--Myrtonos (talk) 13:18, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
4. Against We already have Special:AbuseFilter and Special:NewPages. -- The Zombiebaron 14:33, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
5.  Against. This feels like a solution to something that isn't really all that much of a problem. I've just wrote a new AbuseFilter aimed to deter a specific family of spam article creations. Best thing to do is just whack-a-mole and anything persistent, we'll find a way to deal with it (both Jack and myself already dropped the magic word). -- Lost Labyrinth • (t) • (c) • (a) 18:50, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
6. Against what? I am asking because I suggested an alternative.--Myrtonos (talk) 23:03, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

   As previously mentioned, we have solutions in place such as AbuseFilter, which are already used to deter problematic page creations. Moderating new article creations from anonymous users would just add to the administrative workload whilst adding no real benefit compared to what we are already doing, and restricting article creations entirely is not the way forward. -- Lost Labyrinth • (t) • (c) • (a) 23:24, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

   In that case, how high is the administrative workload already, if that can be easily explained?--Myrtonos (talk) 23:30, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

   Hi Myrtonos, I appreciate your concern about our admin workload. Most attempts at vandalism are controlled or blocked with our automated systems. Additionally there are some users who contribute who wish not to sign up for accounts, and some of our site's most famous edits have been made by IPs. I ask that you consider contributing to Uncyclopedia's content in this regard, and let us worry about the site's administration. →L A B O R A T O R I E S 23:49 3 March 2019