Are we not blocking spammers now? -- 14:50, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- They seem to be hit-and-run, one-edit accounts. And besides, even if we block a few, there will be others. --Ederchil (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 15:23, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- Ling123 has appeared as a particularly vicious spammer, creating pages with Tolkien-like titles but putting in spam.
- I don't know how to affect spamming; the following are random ideas:
- Enforce a delay between signing up and getting editing privileges.
- Require those who want to edit to fill in a talk page.
- Require ID approval.
- -- Gamling 06:24, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
I have only been on this site for a few days but I have noticed how bad the spamming is. Setting up user rights so that new members can only edit after filling out their respective talk page is a good idea (and something I would like to implement on my wiki), however, this might deter genuine members who only want to make minor edits to existing pages and not want to bother with their own user and user talk pages.
Certainly, spam image uploads are a problem too. Uploads can be blocked until a member has reached say 10 edits; this would cut down on spamming images uploads and save the admins a little time having to delete everything that is 'not related'.
I recently installed the recaptcha extension, which is quite useful because it can be used for triggers such as page creation and edits, however, this does not stop spammers if they are persistent and the downside is that unless you add a member to say a 'trusted' usergroup, they will get the captcha box every time they make an edit. I am still exploring this and even though my site is nowhere near as busy as this one I hardly ever get spammers.
The only decent way to stop spammers is for people to require a membership from the admins (after their details have been scrutinised) but this also takes a lot of time. --Kerchi talk | contribs | edits 09:04, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
- I make sure I always block the spammers as on a couple of rare occasions an unblocked one has returned.
- The easy solution to this is to only allow page creation and image uploads once a user is "autoconfirmed" - this would stop 95% of spam. However, to become autoconfirmed you need to register your e-mail address; currently, TG seems unable to send out e-mails, a problem which has lasted a year - if we implemented this now it would block out new users (such as Kerchi and Gamling) as well as the spammers. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 11:13, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
- Maybe we could install that if you want to create an account you have to fill in a question like: "What is the name of the Elf/Wizard/Dwarf in the Fellowship/Company of the Ring" or "What is the name of the son of Denethor II?". Just like some sites have as question "What is the capital of France?" or "What is 7 - 3?". Personally I don't think we should add Captcha, since it doesn't work on all computers/internet browsers (I, once, couldn't create an account on a site because the Captcha didn't work for me).
- If the problem with e-mails could be solved, that would be a good option too.
- I think it's good to block spammers (like Mith does). --Amroth 12:38, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
- Our long-term aim is to install reCAPTCHA so anonymous users are able to edit. However, last time I tried to install it, it didn't work; I think we need to upgrade the software. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 13:28, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
I've made it so there is a minimum number of edits and minutes before a user is made "autoconfirmed" and can create/move pages and upload images; this will hopefully cut out a lot of spammers. Can everyone in this thread please let me know that you are unaffected by these changes? --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 15:54, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
- Impressive solution! -- 16:30, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
- Look's good. --Amroth 17:04, 2 June 2011 (UTC)