Wikipedia:Not every IP is a vandal: Difference between revisions
Undid revision 404794648 by 75.73.114.111 (talk) why? |
Heyitsme22 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
== Recent Changes == |
== Recent Changes == |
||
When looking for vandalism, many search for red usernames without a second look at the blue ones, assuming that red usernames signify a new vandal or IP to punish. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Many users don't make userpages: One substantial editor I can think of is [[User:Nanonic|Nanonic]]. He hasn't made a userpage, yet keeps adding to Wikipedia religiously. The IP [[User talk:76.66.193.90|76.66.193.90]] made over 1,600 constructive edits to the English Wikipedia. Other non-vandal IPs include 220.101.28.25, 24.20.69.240, 69.181.249.92. |
When looking for vandalism, many search for red usernames without a second look at the blue ones, assuming that red usernames signify a new vandal or IP to punish. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Many users don't make userpages: One substantial editor I can think of is [[User:Nanonic|Nanonic]]. He hasn't made a userpage, yet keeps adding to Wikipedia religiously. The IP [[User talk:76.66.193.90|76.66.193.90]] made over 1,600 constructive edits to the English Wikipedia. Other non-vandal IPs include 220.101.28.25, 24.20.69.240, 69.181.249.92, 207.157.121.52. |
||
On the [[:sco:|Scots Wikipedia]], there is an IP that constantly helps us out with vandalism and other tasks like translating. He has been there for more than a year without a username and has become colloquially known as 84.135, a shortened form of the IP. |
On the [[:sco:|Scots Wikipedia]], there is an IP that constantly helps us out with vandalism and other tasks like translating. He has been there for more than a year without a username and has become colloquially known as 84.135, a shortened form of the IP. |
||
Revision as of 13:00, 11 June 2011
 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
Take a look at this. I don't mean to single any one user out, but this edit revert was not necessary. This was probably reverted because the editor wasn't registered; i.e., they were under an IP address. Of course, many of these are indeed vandals: a quick look at Special:RecentChanges will tell you that. But these edits are usually reverted – and usually without checking what the edit consisted of. What I'm getting at is: Not every IP is a vandal.
Recent Changes
When looking for vandalism, many search for red usernames without a second look at the blue ones, assuming that red usernames signify a new vandal or IP to punish. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Many users don't make userpages: One substantial editor I can think of is Nanonic. He hasn't made a userpage, yet keeps adding to Wikipedia religiously. The IP 76.66.193.90 made over 1,600 constructive edits to the English Wikipedia. Other non-vandal IPs include 220.101.28.25, 24.20.69.240, 69.181.249.92, 207.157.121.52.
On the Scots Wikipedia, there is an IP that constantly helps us out with vandalism and other tasks like translating. He has been there for more than a year without a username and has become colloquially known as 84.135, a shortened form of the IP.
On Wikispecies, the IP 130.216.1.16 constructively contributed over 10,000 of edits and thousands of new articles. The IP only registered simply because he needs to request to become an administrator to deal with vandalism by other IPs.
And probably most prominently and locally, right here on the English Wikipedia, 68.39.174.238 (now known as 76.117.247.55) is likely the best example of an IP editor on Wikipedia. They have been around for years, and very nearly became an administrator. An inspirational user, and one without an account.
Check before you revert
So, to finish, please oh please check before you revert, as what may seem like being bold and clever may just be shoving a new user out of Wikipedia editing forever.