User:Gareth

This user thinks that registration should be required to edit articles.

• The power of wikis (templates have since been deleted or updated - I wish I had taken a screenshot of this to show the full horror)

Wikipedia has a big problem - it allows unregistered (IP) users to edit most pages. This situation undermines registered users, because those who have registered have to deal with the consequences of reputation - a user that continually makes very poor edits and ignores the rules will (theoretically) be blocked from editing. Any additional accounts that person creates will (theoretically) be blocked as sockpuppets of the first account. Users that (theoretically) have a good understanding of the rules and display good editorial judgement can become administrators; although it doesn't always work out that way.spinning (& DG?)

By contrast, IP editors are largely exempt from the consequences of reputation; something they can use to their advantage. This is because IP addresses can change quite often (and can sometimes be manually changed on demand) and because it is quite easy to have multiple IP addresses going at the same time by editing from different networks. This isn't suspicious in and of itself - it's just the way the internet works. But this phenomenon can be exploited by IP editors to give them selves more power than non-admin registered editors (and perhaps even the admins as well). If you get blocked, simply change your IP address or avoid using that network until the block ends (and the templates placed on user talk pages conveniently tell you exactly when that will happen).

Disruptive IP editors that have an interest in only one page (or a handful of pages) can be stopped with the blunt instrument of semi-protection (and isn't it interesting that all IP editors can be blocked from editing an article due to the actions of just one person, yet protecting the entire encyclopedia from a flood of malicious and non-malicious rubbish is out of the question). But semi-protection is useless against those who hop from article to article and Wikipedia has next to no ability or willingness to deal with these people. Take this user, who was warned repeatedly (and eventually blocked for a month). They just resumed their disruptive editing as soon as the block expired. And what were they doing during that month? Sitting on their hands? Another example. This one has been blocked twice for a grand total of four days - those blocks have been as utterly inconsequential and ineffective as you'd expect. So IPs can just ignore the copious warnings, safe in the knowledge that they are unlikely to be blocked...and even if they are blocked, it probably won't be for very long...and even if the block is long, they can just change IP addresses for a fresh start.

Requiring all editors to register before being able to touch articles wouldn't be a magic bullet, but it would help. It would enable poor edits to stand out by reducing the number of low-quality (often detrimental) drive-by edits that gives us such brilliance as "AFL premiership season and Summer of Cricket matches are not accessible through the 7plus live streaming service due to the digital broadcast rights being owned by Telstra Media and replaces Border Security International until the matches is over and return to normal programming." and "Channel Nine broadcasts all sporting events under the Wide World of Sports brand. The flagship sports of the brand are cricket until Nine lost the rights in 2018, Australian Open Tennis, National Rugby League (NRL), and formerly Australian rules football, until Nine lost the rights in 2006, and Super League while it existed. [...] Nine's other popular recurring sporting events include the State of Origin series, Gillette Twenty20 until Nine lost the rights in 2018, Gillette Series Cricket until Nine lost the rights in 2018, and Test cricket until Nine lost the rights in 2018. and formerly the Australian Swimming Championships until Nine lost the rights in 2009.". It would highlight "new" users that seem to be a bit too technically proficient to be convincing. And it would make Wikipedia a fairer place by applying the consequences of reputation to all users.

insert signature here
date