I'm just curious, and I don't want to assume anything. Why, under your username, are there double edits on just about every article, adding and subtracting the very same thing? And elsewhere, you didn't subtract that? But on other articles, you actually added something (dubiously) profitable? Schmidt talk 17:02, 23 Oct 2005 (EDT)
- He was adding invissible links. This increases the google search position for the websites links added. Polleke
- Can you say that in English, Polleke? I don't think you understood what I meant. There were some articles where he added something, then moved it, and sometimes added it and removed it without putting it anywhere else on the article. And on at least one article he added real information, whether or not it was true. Schmidt talk 08:26, 25 Oct 2005 (EDT)
- Sorry, reading that sentence again I see it doesn't make sense. I looked some more at the changes he made and yeah it's odder than just adding invissible links. He sometimes adds just divs with a 1px height, somestimes just white space and sometimes links in those invissible boxes. Whatever he is trying, he is clogging up our logs. I would suggest a temporariy ban and see what happens. Polleke
Yeah just to clarify, Puta20 is doing what's called Wikispam which is an offshoot of "Comment Spam". Basically this is using a public area to add links to your website. The THEORY behind this is that if more pages have that link then it'll be higher on search engine searches. I've heard it doesn't really work, but it doesn't stop people from writing bots (like Puta20) to do it. I have a personal website that's not really visited that often. Some how it got on someone's list and a bot tried to put 5 spam comments daily on it. There's a lot of people out there that try to do this so any public website is at danger.
--Spork 00:28, 28 Oct 2005 (EDT)
While Google does use links to determine what sites it returns, from my Blogger experience, I know there is a header tag you can add to a web page that will cause Google and other webcrawlers not to credit any links on a page. This is to discourage what Puta20 is doing. I'm guessing all the dummy edits are just to disguise the real vanadlism; I'm thinking a temporary ban isn't what is called for here.
--Aeleas 01:02, 28 Oct 2005 (EDT)
Can this jackass be banned?
- --Bevans (FeldmanSkitzoid) 11:50, 4 Nov 2005 (EST)
Since Oct. 22, Puta20 has made nearly 5000 spam edits. He's hiding website links, messing up formatting, and clogging the history for individual pages and the wiki as a whole. I understand that vandalism will always be a problem, and there will always be corrections to be made, but that's assuming that prompt administrative action will be taken against the offenders. It's futile to try and maintain the integrity of WoWWiki's articles when competing against a bot. I think this wiki could definitely benefit from a couple more admins.--Aeleas 16:14, 4 Nov 2005 (EST)