Forum:Anon creation page spamming

It's getting bad again. 3 pages in total created, one of which asks a question as though this is a forum. I strongly recommend that anonymous users be disallowed from making pages. You do all realise that typing Wikia into a search engine has this wiki right up at the top under the official wikia site ? This site has the highest traffic in all the wikia (presumed) so there has to be spam prevention measures in place. --Speysider (Talk Page) 14:27, April 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't we follow the "Assume Good Faith" rule?-- White Flash  (Talk)  16:09, April 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * I think good faith is lost because I've rarely seen non-registered users (The Wikia Contributors) make a page that isn't fanon or spam or non-vandal edits to existing pages. --Speysider (Talk Page) 16:11, April 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * And what if those IPs does actually help this Wiki, remember someone could have vandalize the Narutopedia under someone else's IP as what Simant told me "Vandals with 2 or 3 edits in the period of 10 minutes don't warrant a block, as the block could stop legitimate editors on public computers from editing. Only persistent vandalism deserves a block.-- White Flash  (Talk)  16:24, April 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm not saying stop them from editing the wiki. I'm saying that they should not be allowed to create new articles, but are free to edit the existing ones. --Speysider (Talk Page) 17:12, April 28, 2012 (UTC)

This sort of wide blocking doesn't fly with Wikia policies. Users would simply complain enough to the central wiki, saying we're abusing our rights and all. I don't think a harder hand in how the wiki works at the moment will do us and the wiki anything good. If genuine vandalism happens, simply block the IP for long enough so they lose interest in doing it, but not so long it would keep someone else from editing if the IP rotates to someone else. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 20:00, April 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * Wikia should really make an exception to high traffic wiki's like this. It's completely unfair to allow wiki's like this be overrun by spammers and trolls. If someone absolutely needs to make a page, they can just create an account like I did. If they don't want to waste time creating an account to spam/troll, they should find something better to do with their time. You should really get in contact with the central wiki to give this wiki special permission as I feel it's only going to make the site look bad if it's overrun by spam. Even worse is that there is ZERO Spam Prevention measures such as CAPTCHA's or anything to stop anon users from making spam pages. --Speysider (Talk Page) 20:09, April 28, 2012 (UTC)

I think CAPTCHA looks like a viable option, though I'm not sure if it's possible to add that. I know that the Wiki engine supports that, because the Portuguese Wikipedia has CAPTCHA on for unregistered users. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 20:26, April 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * It should be simple. This site probably gets all the Wikia spam because it's the very first wikia that gets listed if you search for Wikia on Google, so there should be many more spam prevention measures set up. --Speysider (Talk Page) 20:29, April 28, 2012 (UTC)

I don't get it, probably because Google does that geographical filtering to give more relevant results. I still understand the issue. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 20:49, April 28, 2012 (UTC)

The Google Rank of the wiki is really high, very high --Salil (talk)(Contributions) 04:46, April 29, 2012 (UTC)

What I mean by "I don't get it" is that searching for "wikia" where I live, this wiki doesn't appear in the first ten results, and I haven't looked to see when it shows up. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 04:51, April 29, 2012 (UTC)

It's okay. It wasn't vandalism. —IndxcvNovelist (Talk to Me|My Wiki) 10:26, May 1, 2012 (UTC)

I know this is an old discussion, but still..

Having asked the staff about it this is what they said:

"Yes, such a settings change to make registered users only can add a new page is possible, but this is something that will A) need to first be agreed upon publicly by the community and B) the request with the link to the formal discussion will have to come from an admin." — ¤ U LTIMATE S UPREME¤ (T@lk)☺ 03:49, June 12, 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm... I don't think it's wrong. ~IndxcvNovelist (talk 16:47, June 12, 2012 (UTC)

Discussion
I can see the usefulness of preventing IP to make articles, but I should point out that "nonsense articles" are just a minor inconvenience that is easy to spot and remove. Jacce | Talk | Contributions 06:08, June 15, 2012 (UTC)
 * Prevention is better than cure... — ¤ U LTIMATE S UPREME ¤ (T@lk) 06:16, June 15, 2012 (UTC)