Tips to Editing the Wiki

[Hessah]

To make urself look good for Tri... yes.. you need an edit summary for every thing..

just "updated" or "edited" or "grammar" or "typo" or "fixed" is fine...

[Triumph]

A simple line like "Grammar fix" or "Fixed typo" suffices.

Because when I, or others, go through the lists of edits, it is known that edits tagged as "grammar fix" will be just that, grammar fixes, and not substantial edits.

Since Icy loves to click on each individual edit, he thinks edit summaries are stupid. I'd rather not click through all of them.

[Icy]

Even grammar fixes can go wrong.

You're taking a leap of faith with your laissez-faire approach in believing what anonymous or less frequent users of the wiki claim to have changed.

I don't read edit summaries, true. I look at the entity make the edits. Low risk entities escape my scrutiny.

[Triumph]

You're taking a leap of faith with your laissez-faire approach in believing what anonymous or less frequent users of the wiki claim to have changed.

I'm American. What do you expect?

[Icy]

I'm American. What do you expect?

Nothing more. Shame on you. Keep your Americanism off the wiki management.

My talk page was spammed. I war spammers now.

Edit: Judging from Triumph's reaction towards the spamming of the talk page of a wiki bureaucrat i.e. through implementing preventive measures on his own talk page, he acknowledges my point.

[Gandalfa82]

I would have to agree with Icy about checking the edits. I myself make quite a few grammar mistakes and have been known to correct something incorrectly only to have to fix it again. I follow alone the line that Icy does and check all edits that have been made if made by certain people I will look at it but will assume they have the correct facts from their involvement with the wiki. In other words if they are a normal contributor I'll assume any facts I don't know to be correct, if they are an anonymous user I'll recheck the information that they add just to be sure.

[Triumph]

Edit: Judging from Triumph's reaction towards the spamming of the talk page of a wiki bureaucrat i.e. through implementing preventive measures on his own talk page, he acknowledges my point.

Your user page was vandalized too. I reverted that one, seems like they targeted you first.

And a war was just fought on my user page, there's no need to have more aerial bombing on it.

Hence the protection.

[Belaslav]

Okay, I don't wanna sound like a broken record but how come unregistered users are actually allowed to edit the wiki?

[Ivramire]

Okay, I don't wanna sound like a broken record but how come unregistered users are actually allowed to edit the wiki?

I think this is why.

they decided not to make people register to edit the wiki a long time ago because there were unregistered users really adding stuff to it and someone registered just to say they shouldn't...


here's the thread where it was mentioned before:
http://www.fiestafan.com/forums/show...?t=2311&page=2

but then...

You'll be surprised how having to register deters opportunistic mass spammers. Registering doesn't take a lot of effort if you do want to contribute. Cynical as I am, I should also point out that most people who register output contribution that are both higher in quantity and quality.

The best way to iron out such spam is to require random image verification for inclusion of external links, but I have been told that this would not be implemented. The next best way is to place a global ban on the creation of new pages by unregistered users. This is not something soft admins can do. I don't have the time to click through all those new pages created this time.

[Belaslav]

So what you're saying Icy cannot change that because his admin clearance is not high enough?