Board Thread:Site Policy/@comment-4750363-20130703214523/@comment-23780813-20130703232052

CrashingCymbal wrote: Reading pointed out to me today that usually vandalism of articles here occurs once every 2 weeks. He also pointed out that in the 48 hours that we have allowed Anonymous editing, that there has been 4 reported vandalisms of articles. I encountered it firsthand myself today, when some user had intellectually wrote "TACOS" at the end of a story. Brilliant.

Now, I know that SOME contributers have been good and fixed articles with HONEST intentions, but I have seen admins have to edit Anon's talk pages to warn them of bad edits several times, and have had to edit other pages to coincide with the new Anon rule. (Example, on the Pasta and Image of the Month Nomination Page, they had to edit it to "No Anonymous Nominations)

Now, I know that opening this Wikia up to anon contributers is a good way of promoting the site, but is it really necessary? Most people join up to create stories and edit anyway, and Anon's mostly only read stories here, and allowing them to edit, in my opinion, is only going to cause further hastle and invite trouble here.

Maybe if we allowed Anon's to only edit talk pages on articles, then I perhaps be leaning towards a Nuetral or Support, but with regards to all unlocked articles? A definite no no from me. 4 pages vandalised? As far as I have seen there has only been one page that was actually "vandalised", the rest were just an anon adding something stupid to the pages. Honetly 4 small cases aren't even bad, that amounts to about 3-4 seconds of extra work. In fact 3/4 accounts were undone by anonymous contributors. Moving on, the AbuseFilter has been set up to prevent anons from doing everything but editing pages (to which they only have a 150 byte allowance). While restricting them to talkpage editing from the time being may not be a bad plan of action but it certainly isn't a permanent sollution and neither is locking the wiki.