Forum:Unregistered users

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Unregistered users
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 2 October 2009 by Calebchiam.

I'm so tired of vandalism made by Annonymous IPs'. Like 8/10 of them are from unregistered users.

So my suggestion is that to be able to edit an article you MUST be registered and have created that account 4 days before. This would reduce Vandalism in this Wiki. Actually, I see no reason for someone to edit things without using an account.

I know this is a harsh decision but it's something that has to be made.

Sorry for my awful english, it's not my mother language. Makxtrl Talk 00:24, October 2, 2009 (UTC)


  • Support - Per nom. Makxtrl Talk 00:24, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Omfg No More Rule Liek Dat Its Like Blubapedia Again! Oh and some edits are really quite good the Spot stealing was made by a IPTwig Talk 772kZGs.png 00:27, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose - IP addresses are one of our strongest editors. Just because they are not registered doesn't mean they want to vandalize. And plus, how can it stop vandals? They just make a bunch of accounts, and edit from them. Also, please take a look at this forum on the same topic. The consensus was to allow IPs to edit, and this proposal is the same. ~MuzTalk 00:30, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose As far as I know, that goes against Wikia's set rules. It's a wiki that anyone can edit. Also, I know a few editors who can't make accounts for various reasons, but still post good information and not vandalism. Also, RS:AEAE, so we couldn't discriminate against IP's unless that too was destroyed. Zaros symbol.pngChaos Monk Talk SignCoins 250.png 00:31, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment - Ok... Close. Makxtrl Talk 00:32, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose While it is indeed a fact that most vandalism comes from IPs, it is not true that most IPs vandalize. Their is a lot they contribute here if you take the time to examine a few hundred random IP edits. I guess this proposal must resurface every now and then since past consensus does not imply future consensus, but I hope people will look at all the good that IPs contribute before they cast their votes.--Degenret01 00:34, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

Ok so, is it too hard to create an account, instead of IP Editing? That is pissing me off lately Makxtrl Talk 00:36, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - Here's a great example of an IP [1] editing helpfully by fixing a table. When in doubt, it's always best to think all editors are editing in good faith. Zaros symbol.pngChaos Monk Talk SignCoins 250.png 00:42, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

Quite a lot of IP's are like that or Boom like that Twig Talk 772kZGs.png 00:44, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
Why don't you check this edit do you think that I should assume GOOD FAITH in there? NO. I know that all IP's are not vandals but c'mon... I repeat, how hard is to create an account? Makxtrl Talk 00:48, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
Using brute force never works. And there's always bad apples in every shipment. Humanity is flawed, some get kicks from that stuff, and having them register would mean they could cause more damage. Zaros symbol.pngChaos Monk Talk SignCoins 250.png 00:48, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
And if we become like Blubapedia im leaving they are STRICT and some people don't have the time or can get the user name they want Twig Talk 772kZGs.png 00:49, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

Undecided -I'm iffy on this topic. Sometime's IP addresses provide information, but are too lazy to log in. Sometimes they are just vandals and don't have an account. Babyvegeta93 00:55, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - Even some trusted users started out as vandals Twig Talk 772kZGs.png 01:02, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - IP are users who don't sign in. They're editors. Contributors. And you want to tell them that they can't add just because they don't want to make an account...? Quite frankly, that's ridiculous. Overwhelming majority of editors started out as IP editors, and disallowing such contributions would do nothing but hinder the project. We have enough able administrators to deal with the vandalous part of them. Now that's a throwing weapon!Doucher4000******r4000I'll eat you! 02:37, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - per RuneScape:All editors are equal. This isn't the first time someone has made a completely ridiculous suggestion like this without even considering how everyone would feel. MOST IPs are NOT vandals, and even some that DO vandalism eventually turn around and make constructive edits. IPs make just as many if not more edits than registered users. Without them this wiki would be a LOT smaller. We are a wiki that anyone can edit and it's proposals like these that show some people just don't understand the meaning of all editors are equal. Andrew talk 02:49, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - The cases where IPs vandalize and then make good faith edits (or vice versa) can often be attributed to dynamic IPs. A single IP can end up being assigned to more than one person over time, which is a good reason for why IP bans should have a relatively limited length. --Quarenon  Talk 03:14, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - Per D4K and Soldier. Wikia may not even allow this, and in general it would result in a reduction of good edits. --Quarenon  Talk 03:14, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - This ruins the whole point of Wiki...and we had this discussion before. I bet degenret had a fit when he saw this. (hehe) Santa hat.png Powers38 おはようヾ(´・ω・`) 04:09, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

Strong oppose - This not only violates the entire spirit of the Wiki, but is against two of our most important policies, RS:AEAE and RS:AGF. Also, inb4 Robert horning has a stroke kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 04:18, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

Closed - I believe RS:SNOW is applicable here, becuase this idea will always be shot down because it goes against the beliefs we have. Not to mention that we have unanimous opposition for this idea. C.ChiamTalk 06:30, October 2, 2009 (UTC)