Template talk:Repeated IP abuse: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Bill Thayer (talk | contribs)
Rossami (talk | contribs)
Line 12: Line 12:


::::Not all repeat vandals are shared-IP's, by any means. And of those that are, not infrequently the entire list of "contributions" is vandalism, whether it's just a single user at that shared address (the others not caring to do Wikipedia, or whether, as in the case of a number of schools, it's all a pile of young children each doing their own vandalism. [[User:Bill Thayer|Bill]] 13:32, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
::::Not all repeat vandals are shared-IP's, by any means. And of those that are, not infrequently the entire list of "contributions" is vandalism, whether it's just a single user at that shared address (the others not caring to do Wikipedia, or whether, as in the case of a number of schools, it's all a pile of young children each doing their own vandalism. [[User:Bill Thayer|Bill]] 13:32, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I would also oppose the automatic inclusion of the shared IP comment. Some vandal accounts are shared, some are not. Shared IPs should be noted separately using the {{tl|sharedIP|}} template. [[User:Rossami|Rossami]] <small>[[User talk:Rossami|(talk)]]</small> 14:28, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:28, 3 March 2006

Purpose

Used to mark pages of anonymous editors who have been repeatedly blocked for vandalism.

Changes

Personally, I preferred the yellow, stood out more. My eyes are in their mid-30's and didn't mind. I dont' really care about the vandal's eyes.  :) Wikibofh(talk) 17:22, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not supposed to be obnoxious. We got some template guidelines for talkpages which we should stick to.SoothingR 23:32, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer the the yellow - it carries more content, shall we say. But what I came here for was to suggest adding something the following
  • Note: This a shared IP Address. <strong>Please use only short blocks</strong> to limit collateral damage.<br>
An example may be seen at [1]. Regards, Ben Aveling 11:17, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not all repeat vandals are shared-IP's, by any means. And of those that are, not infrequently the entire list of "contributions" is vandalism, whether it's just a single user at that shared address (the others not caring to do Wikipedia, or whether, as in the case of a number of schools, it's all a pile of young children each doing their own vandalism. Bill 13:32, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would also oppose the automatic inclusion of the shared IP comment. Some vandal accounts are shared, some are not. Shared IPs should be noted separately using the {{sharedIP}} template. Rossami (talk) 14:28, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]